Heard a few teams are breaking away to maybe start there own league away from Division 1 USL.

where did you get this information?

Imfo: Fell onto my plate from the powers above. A storm is a coming so hold onto your soccer balls sounds like a level 3 and growing. Like the weather man always says: Tie everything down could be a rough one. League meetings are in a few weeks. See who sinks or swims.

I heard that more than half the USL1 teams and maybe a couple of USL2 teams may be leaving. The ball is in the League's court now.

Any relation to the USL Owners Association and the USl 1 relaunch that was rumored mid-season?

Its not surprising really. What USL1 and USL2 teams have done they have done on their own -- its not like the league itself is bringing much to the table in terms of TV deal, sponsors, etc. Therefore, its not too surprising that a group of like-minded owners are getting together to launch their own league.

I've heard these rumors almost every year. I'm not expecting anything.

Let's assume for a moment that the rumors are true. That being the case, (1) what would be the reason for leaving the USL and (2) what would be gained for the teams that leave?

just a guess but probably getting out from under the arbitrary thumb of Generalisimo Marcos might have a lot to do with it. Also theres alot of little administrative details... fees and fines and such that teams are not happy with and see little benefit from. Who knows maybe we'll see what amounts to a breakaway merger between some D1 and D2 teams.

Maybe they want ownership in the league?

Split expansion fees between the current clubs (50% to league office).

Maybe they want some stronger league wide marketing.

Maybe they want a 20 team league with promotion/relegation
l)

Maybe MLS will form a next division with promotion relegation so they can accept more teams and give them a shot while playing on the field. Probably not, but as long as we all are speculating, one can hope.

That would be nice! One of the reasons Fifa frowns at them. But then the high sand mighty MLS would have to change player contracts. But that might also welcome Mr. Man U into the league if they changed he already has his own stadium here to play in. Malcom already owns the Bucs in Tampa, Man U in England. He should be a model for MLS. He obviously knows how to make money not lose it.

Sandman, I have some questions about this -

1. Who exactly told you?
2. What/how many teams are considering leaving?
3. What league do these teams propose to play in or form?
4. If this would be a new professional league, has it been acknowledged and sanctioned by the USSF?
- looking for some facts. Thank you -

What kills me is that the people who have run soccer over the years have never been on the same page, which keeps the sport from growing. These breakaway leagues do more damage to the sport than good. Look what happened to indoor soccer and the old MISL. Owners become greedy thinking they can do it better on their own.

" Carolina, Montreal, Miami, Portland, Puerto Rico, Atlanta and Vancouver haven't signed on for 2009 yet still contemplating a break away league, leaving Rochester, Minnesota, Charleston and Austin to battle it out."

I found this on a Rochester blog. Odd collection of teams to be leaving.

http://www.uslsoccer.com/home/288928.html

Portland just added a PDL team to the USL. They are not leaving.

They probably trying to force some change in the league of some sort, I know that the PR owners are coming in with the demand that the final should be changed into two legged series for the league meeting in a few weeks. They reported this in a local newspaper.

Funny that all but Carolina and Puerto Rico are represented for MLS expansion.

I think this has something to do with league fees getting higher than is justified. Not much USL can do without those teams, and not much those teams can do without USL.

"This is nothing to do with any changes Nike wants to make to the league, it is about the lack of support from Nike and the USL lack of resources for D1 specifically (the appointment of Chris Econ being a case of far too little, too late). The Miami guys are leading the charge, followed closely by Carolina and Atlanta with strong support from the Mighty Canadians! Four major cities are ready to join up as expansion franchises and Puerto Rico and Portland are on the fence. Rochester and Charleston are not invited to the party and Tampa wants to join but has just put a big amount of money in the USL bank."

More from Rochester blog.

can you link the blog?

Barroom is on target! Make sure you check out that Rochester Blog! Glad to see someone has a clue! Sounds like uncle Boris might be afraid with Mr. Home Depot posting up the cash for MLS franchise. What ever happened to John Latham in Atlanta he was quite a visionary for the league and has always supported soccer in Atlanta being either Men's or Women's. The one thing that we all forget is it's all a business in the end. Who knows Blank and Boris may have cut some deals behind closed doors?

ASL 4 maybe?

Devo's blog: http://www.democratandchronicle.com/blogs/devo
Each article has comments posted.....I didn't go plowing to find the exact article & specific posts that had USL rumors.

And here's the thread on their forum where they're talking about it: http://www.rhinoszone.com/forum/viewthread.php?thread_id=966&rowstart=0

So, all this is about anonymous posts on a Rochester soccer blog. Oh, that's REAL PROOF! :rolleyes:

The Moderator needs to close this thread.

Why? There are some owners (PDL) who want to break away.

Interesting timing. I'm sure they were in favor of the two-legged final a year ago at this time, right? Funny how that works.

They wouldn't have had to "demand" anything if they'd just come through with a decent bid to host the final this year. Everything would have been hunky dory.

You know FSC has had a mandet not to have any games broadcast from PR due to the cost, FSC and the league for bending over an taking it are to blame! Period, we shouldnt have to give two to three times what other cities have to pay to host the final!

I'd like to find out where this all started, and if there is any truth to it. Like I posted to the blog, if US Soccer sanctions it, then FIFA will. Not saying that USSF would, but if a new league looked to be more viable, they just might. I've wondered if maybe some of the cities snubbed by MLS might band together and form a "Division 1-AA" league that would essentially put the USL wholly in Div. 3.

There were a few teams considering a breakaway but I think they are returning to the league because they don't have the resources to start a new league this year. All of the teams will be back except one. That team is done.

The best way to keep an I on an Enemy is to keep them close. Welcome to the Layer Cake! Maybe someone needs a slappin'! Out of respect.

So what team is folding? USL 1st Division?, USL 2nd Division?

I'll play along...my guess is either Western Mass or Bermuda (both in USL 2nd Division)

Jarich, care to share any sources?

If it's USL1, I'm guessing Atlanta. It appears their owners essentially folded up shop in August.

Perhaps he was referring to Seattle.

I'm betting that there will be only two teams in the Southern Derby next year.

Oooo, I hope not. Then again, if somebody told the average Atlanta soccer fan that the Silverbacks folded, they'd probably either say "Who?" or "What, they were still around?" or "That's sad; I always wanted to see a pro lacrosse game."

I would have to agree with that. I don't think the Home Depot team stands a chance of getting in MLS. I think Boris isn't taking any chances. I think there might be something in the works with the new WPL team. Let's face it the Beat drew a better gate than the Silverbacks.

So, you think ATL is dead as far as MLS is concerned (I'm sort of afraid that if Blank can't get in, Atlanta soccer fans will be so mad (I know I will), that nobody else will want to)? Why? As far as the Beat goes, the reason why they outdrew the 'Backs almost 4:1 is because they did the things necessary to get people to come out. The 'Backs haven't, plain and simple.

I'm hearing that at least one team is going on hiatus and another team has folded, despite pretty deep pockets.

I tend to agree... how many "I'm hearing things" can people post. Name your club info or leave the kitchen.

don't read the thread if you don't want the speculation.

People have asked me not to mention what teams as they want to tell players and staff first. By Wednesday we should have all we need to know.

My comments weren't directly just at yourself, so don't take offense.

However, your reply does justify my point. Why only stir the pot halfway ?... makes no sense. If you don't want to disrespect a certain group of players or owners, then don't say anything or in the very least just go with..."hey, heard that Weds. will bring about some news."

With supporting the USL, you get used to the yearly hearsay and off the wall comments but I gotta say it's pretty old. Marcos,Holt and the like do a wonderful job of trying to bring the sport of soccer to the next level in this country.... can't understand why so many folks always want to stir the pot.

Good point. I was just trying to shed a little light on the situation.

These things happen in US soccer all the time, but when it happens in the USL 1 - its a bigger story.

Ok girls and boys this the time to play welcome to Vegas! AGM starts this week. Who wants to play:
Who stays who goes! Any takers. I'm saying at least 2 USL Division 1 teams are out. Canadian teams don't count we all know they go to MLS as soon as they let them.

Sandman, you obviously have some very credible information. It almost seems like you are enjoying seeing the league shed some teams. I am sure that is probably not the case. Maybe you are just excited about having a "scoop".

I get the same vibe with Jarich.

You guys do know what you are talking about though. The news is already out there now:

ATL is out.

Sorry, "No" I can't reveal my source. I can say that it is not anyone officially related to the Silverbacks or Islanders or the league.

The players under contracts are now free agents.
Kandji and Toure were firesales.

I can't understand how this happened with ReMax and Boris owning part of the Railhawks. Even with Blank's MLS bid.

Why is atlanta selling season tickets for? mmmm, yanky you know I usually go with you in rumors since like 100% you told me turned out to be true, so im on the fence on this one.

No matter what you do you sell tickets to the end to keep money coming in. That satisfies potential sponsors if things happen to survive the storm. What if your trying to shop the team?
Show positive numbers. Just ask the old Colts here today and gone in the night!

With the economy teams will always come and go. Soccer is going to succeed in America but at what level the future will tell. Mr. Blank knows how to make money and keep making it. Just ask the Glaziers US Soccer is moving forward but not enough for them yet. They have Man U.,Bucs and already a stadium. When the time is right they will participate.

Bro. It's not just a rumor. The info that I have is that the Silverbacks owner has been planning on folding the Silverbacks pro side definitely (the W and reserve side will probably fold as well).

There was a reason why he was trying to get $200k for Kandji. They sent Toure packing. Front office Staff was getting let go. The owner was planning on getting rid of the team. Knowing what I know now, I'm surprised that he continued to do any more infrastructure improvements at Remax stadium last year (like some bathrooms).

Looking back, with more information, it starts to become a bit more clear.

It will be curious to see if he sells his share of the Railhawks in the next year or two.

One day to D-Day and everything will be revealed.

DONE!!!!
http://atlantasilverbacks.com/news/displaynews.php?id=1046

My condolences to the Silverback fans.

One of the two teams in question, is apparently working with the league to stay in for one more year.

Also, heard that we may have another A-league team in '09.

Does anybody know anything about this?


Rumor (qualified source) has it that the owners of the teams that make up the USL-1 teams have had enough with the leadership (or lack thereof) that currently exists in the USL and want to start their own league. It seems to be spearheaded mostly by the Miami FC ownership group, Traffic, who feel that the product that is currently in the USL could be put on more of a grand stage, similar to MLS, with MLS marketing dollars and coverage. I think it's a long shot, because if people already don't pay attention to the MLS, why would they pay attention to another league. It just seems like a lot of money will be put into a venture that is destined to fail. The MLS will continue to swoop in and acquire markets that the USL (or whatever the new league is called, if it comes to fruition) and it will render the team in that area obsolete. It's happened in Toronto, Seattle, Atlanta, and soon to be in other USL markets in the near future.

What, exactly, is keeping Traffic from spending a lot of money to promote the team it has now?

It's about more than just marketing dollars, though, from a league-wide perspective. They'd have to amp up their investment in everything they do - players, stadiums, coaches, marketing, television, you name it.

And I don't think all the USL-1 owners have the financial wherewithal to do that.

Well, the ones that do have either already gone up to MLS or intend to. I don't really see this happening, unless Traffic can convince the other owners that bleeding out on the sidewalk would be a great idea.

Seems silly to me - I mean look how well Traffic has done with Miami FC?

While we like to bitch about the USL's brass, they've actually done a pretty good job keeping a stable league together for quite a long time. The teams haven't always been stable, but that's the risk you run when each ownership group and sink or swim on their own.

then was is this all about?

http://www.ovaciondigital.com.uy/090803/...nos-de-rocha-fc

Sorry but I don't know Spanish...can anybody boil this down and share what the article says?

They have the internet on computers now (babelfish always translates "equipo" - team - as "equipment"):

An equipment of Miami will handle the destinies of Rocha FC

The North American equipment Miami Selection became the main investor of Rocha FC, club which hopes to raise First and using like display cabinet of players.

The operation took shape days in the last and was confirmed by Manny Rivero, president of Miami Selection, to the New Herald de Miami.

“With a group of investors, between whom is Uvaldo Rodriguez de Miami, we have taken the reins from Rocha FC´´, showed Rivero.

By means of the reached agreement, Miami Selection would become position of all the debts of the club (number that would ascend to US$ 500,000) and will take control by five years, with an option of five years more.

Miami selection is an equipment Sub 23, that disputes a local match called Tri-County League.

Financed by an investing group called Traffic Sports, the equipment already knew close by the reality of Uruguayan soccer, where it has an agreement with the Danube for interchange of players.

In addition, already it had tried in the past giving a jump to the professionalism, when they asked for a license to acquire an equipment of the third division of the United States.

“We had aspirations to do it in the United States, but we have ourselves we found with many difficulties. They denied a tax exemption to us in the third division of the United Soccer League although we had the support of Miami FC and, on the other hand, the MLS wants that we give jugadores´´ to him, explained Rivero.

Anyway, the Cuban leader was as with the acquisition of Rocha, “the display cabinet” that they looked for.

“This is the display cabinet that we wanted in Miami´´, it expressed and it added that now its priority is to obtain the ascent to First.

“Our immediate goal is to return to Rocha FC to Series A. The second goal is to sell players and third it is to develop the system completely to find, to recruit and to form jugadores´´.

Hebert Arming Rivers, manager and sport director of the Miami Selection, now happened to be president of Rocha FC and Tuesday will travel to begin to become position of the club.

Next to him four players will arrive from the Miami selection: Frank Alvaro, Andres Lopez, Shelvy Printemp and Lucas Garci'a, all young people of 17 and 18 years.


Looks like Miami FC has acquired some club called Rocha FC which apparently plays in Uruguay's second division. Which has absolutely nothing to do with any USL teams breaking away and forming their own league in the US.

Don't see how the owners in the USL 1 spend any more money to compete with MLS, unless they are hoping for some sort of merger.

Exactly:

i know there are some that might laugh here but Garber might have the last laugh. Can't name any sources or provide links but MLS is in the process of purchasing USL. rumor is that there are three entity's looking to buy USL and MLS is one of them. when it happens we will all know. So soon you can say that MLS owns USL.

"MLS is in the process of purchasing USL."

And your source on that one is......???

It's a rumor I'm trying to figure out, but it wasn't posted by me.

MLS is not interested in purchasing USL. Read todays post by Kartik Krishnaiyer at Major League Soccer Talk. Just yesterday Garber was dissing the USL.

There is a good possibility that USL will be going through some changes soon to make the league better. That's all I can say for now, but I will tell you that it is very sad that MLS wants all the glitz and glory of Hollywood and to say they have the best league, which they do matching up team by team, but not all that much better and there are many things about USL that are better than MLS.

USL is a pyramid system and PDL for instance has never been healthier. It's a great way to develop players. Garber can talk down to USL all he wants, but until he starts to put his money where his mouth is I just see it as hype.

Even a few MLS teams are getting involved with USL, like the Chicago Fire who have a PDL team. MLS hates that Chicago is involved with USL in this way yet the Fire are one of the few MLS teams who are actually concerned with developing players. Do you know who started that model? Peter Wilt who was ousted by AEG exec. Tim Leiweke. Yes, the same Tim Leiweke in the book, the Beckham Experiment.

Does the Chicago Fire actually own the PDL team or do they just license the name?

BQ, you mention that the USL might be going through a few changes?!?! Any chance you can shed some light on the subject or share some sources?

I heard the same thing (second hand) today, but that was it - just that there were going to be some changes that would come to light within a few weeks - but nothing else.

Hhhhmmm....

I can't at the present time. Sorry!

I do not believe they own it. The PDL team in question was not started by the Fire, though they do share some resources. So it's not a question of the Fire being gung-ho about player development, because, if you know anything about the current state of their organization, they can hardly find the men's room, much less develop players.

If so, it might be the first thing by that waste of space that I ever agreed with.



A list would be good here. "Passion" doesn't count - that's that ethereal b.s. USL types spout that can't be proven or disproven and which they want you to think makes up for being low-rent.



Well, graphically, it's set up as one. But you don't usually actually see players go UP the pyramid. Sometimes, yeah. But the best PDL players skip the other two levels entirely, usually. And USL-2 players aren't just marking time until they're good enough for USL-1, usually.



Define "healthier." Of course, it helps when you don't have player expense and your travel is regional.



I don't even know what this sentence means. What should he spend his own money on? Why?



Or, more correctly, have a PDL team that they've partnered with, but they don't "have" a PDL team.



Source?



Except Tim Leiweke wasn't the one who fired him. Shawn Hunter was. Ask Wilt yourself.

Maybe it has to do with any of these expansion cities:

A short list of markets from which we believe a USL-1 franchise could be successful with the proper ownership and venue include, but are not limited to (in no specific order): Omaha (NE), Tulsa (OK), San Antonio (TX), Phoenix (AZ), Boise (ID), Oklahoma City (OK), Albuquerque (NM), Memphis (TN), and Birmingham (AL) We are currently in advanced discussions with interested parties in several of these markets.

Maybe WHAT has to do with any of these expansion cities?

Dude, what IS it with you?

This:

http://www.mls-rumors.net/2009/08/question-should-mls-buy-usl.html

Hi, reading the posts here, I've got a question for those of you that know that something is goinh to happen in the next few weeks: Someone who's been looking into getting a usl franchise, should he keep on going, give it up or wait a bit?

I have no idea what's going on, and I would bet no one really does at this point...

Keep going forward with the knowledge that USL is for sale. The games will be played in some form or another. Ask questions on how that sale may effect a new team entering the league, then come back here and tell us what's going on.

Go forward, just make sure your deposit can be refunded if some major changes happen.

Note to you: MLS Rumors is run by hysterical people who aren't quite smart enough to frequent Bigsoccer.com. THAT should give you an idea of their intelligence level.

They have no idea AT ALL about reporting, much less journalism. They run with EVERYTHING because if 1 thing in 50 that they report comes true, then they crow about it. They fell for the Justin Mapp to Benfica thing yesterday.

You should not, under any circumstances, use MLS Rumors as a reliable source for anything. If MLS Rumors says the sun is going to come up tomorrow, set your alarm clock and get up early to check, just to be sure.

Fabulous: "This probably won't happen, it's unlikely, but here's a headline anyway." Great.

The one time I would agree with BS, MLS Rumors is rubbish. I followed up with Chis Economides on the MLS rumors thing just in case and what he told that person "off the record" went on the record and was misinterpreted besides.

The second link is much more accurate and yes, there has been interest by MLS. However, as the article says, they are not offering enough money. On top of that, do you think that MLS would have USL's best interest in mind top to bottom? I can tell you right now they would not and do not. However, MLS has interesting and very powerful bedfellows. So be careful what you wish for.

As to Franky, I would proceed very slowly right now. I think we will know within the next couple of weeks and if the main suitor of USL ends up the winner, it will be the best case scenario for League at this moment and time.

USL buyout discussion is filled with ignorant discourse. THIS IS A MUST READ! Great article by my friend Kartik Krishnaiyer: http://bit.ly/qBt0B

He's your friend? That explains a lot.

So what could the recourse be? Rich investors buy the league and decide to compete against MLS head-on? or they stay a second division status and work with Fifa to force MLS to concede to pro/rel.

Friends: maybe if your nice, we'll explain to you what they are.

Hint #1 they're not only your dog, some should be real people that are still alive.

I made my own post on the subject this morning. Follow the link below.

Good article. Thanks Whitestar.

here is a little tidbit about the USL situation: audio 44:40

http://www.soccersam.com/media/audio/20090822.mp3

Hint #2: My friends are good at grammar.

Oh, and your sister.

Why are those the only two scenarios you can envision?

You'd be dumb to try to compete with MLS head-on because it would cost a ton of money that you'd rather spend in better ways (plus, MLS already has the markets and the stadiums and the TV contracts, so, good luck banging your head against THAT wall).

And why, why, why, why WHY would you just assume that
(a ) you COULD or would get FIFA to "force" MLS to do anything?
(b ) because YOU and other europoseurs are obsessed with pro/rel that everybody is in favor of it, or thinks it would be best for USL?
(c ) the reasons we don't have pro/rel are all summed up by "big bad MLS doesn't want us in their party?"

Seriously....can you PLEASE think?

another top notch Q&A session

http://www.american11soccer.com/

wow, finally got through these pages....

Just don't understand why USL1 and USL2 are referred to as divisions in relation to MLS.....teams in those two groups don't ever get move up to the MLS level, do they? Also America is land of competition, why is it that these two groups be where others placed them?

Isn't FIFA's mission is to develop the sport of soccer/football regardless? FIFA recognition is good, but is it necessary to develop the sport? won't FIFA be laugh at if it does not acknowledge good soccer players or leagues?

Well, perhaps it's about some needs to rock the boat of soccer/football in America! The sport suffer on the world stage because certain individuals do not want to open their house for everyone, they want to protect their own interests only.

There must be more than 150 clubs in the USL groups? If so, then they could get exposures much more than any MLS team. Corporate dollars will come when there are good returns to the corporations. If say 150 clubs, which each club probably has more than one team, started a league....I don't see how that can fail.

I don't know what cost to operate a USL club, but I'm think it must be under $1,000,000 a year? Oh, how much do players get pay in the USL groups since these are considered "professionals"?

It would be good to see that America's soccer moving to standardize as in the rest of the world. It must be only those that are afraid of open competition for teams in the whole country that do want only their own little leagues to control.

People who run corporations are pioneering and success oriented, they want to be associated with people who share their mindset. Again, the corporate money will come when the sport has sufficient exposures to earn that money.

until next time.....

I admit, it can seem confusing, this American exceptionalism.

Unless you've spent some time here following how we do things, it's only natural that you'd scratch your head and say, "Wait a minute, you mean they don't.....?"

USL1 and USL2 are second and third divisions per USSF. Each country's governing body determines who meets the criteria.

We HAD no Division I soccer in this country from 1985-1995. Nobody "placed" the teams where they are. For the most part, they've chosen their level. Far more teams have self-relegated over the past 10 years than have even dreamed of moving up a division.

And if you don't have FIFA recognition, you're an outlaw league. Your players can't play in any FIFA-sponsored events. For the most part, there aren't a lot of national-team level players (of any country) at the USL level, so the World Cup isn't an issue for most, but there are other events (like futsal) under FIFA's auspices, and W-League and PDL players can hope to improve and represent their countries. That avenue would be shut off to them if they play in an outlaw league.

Same thing happened back in the primordial soup days, but the United Soccer Association and National Professional Soccer League saw that they were hurting each other by competing, and merged into one league (the NASL) that had USSF and FIFA backing.

And if there were more than 150 clubs in USL (there aren't), that would be one thing - if the bulk of them weren't PDL teams that nobody cares about.

You could operate a USL-2 or PDL or W-League club for WELL under a million a year. But nowadays, you'd struggle to make ends meet on a $1M budget in USL in most places.

Bernie...thanks for replying

lived practically my whole life in the old USA, and thought was the best country in the world then....

well, those who only lived in the USA need to step outside and look back in....perhaps you may see what others are seeing of Americans' thinkings

soccer is soccer regardless of what levels/leagues that you play. some people are just better than others, and you will have people at all skill levels. those who are better will move up and those who are not will move down.

perhaps the only real reason to have so many divisions/leagues in the USA is so that each can be the "king" of their own little domains? it's kindda like winner of the superbowl (american football) called themselves "champions of the world" yet they haven't even compete with anyone else other than those in the USA? kindda funny and laughable?

soccer/football is the only real global sport and anyone that won the world cup title....would earn the right to be called "champions of the world".

FIFA is there for the sake of developing and recognizing the sport of soccer/football....why would it not back a good league/players?

there's just too much politics in soccer in USA, it's not about developing the sport, but rather about who controls what/who in american soccer.

america is good in many things, but definitely not soccer/football on the global market.

there are too many insignificant issues in american soccer that does nothing other than degrade the sport on the world stage. get rid of the so many little leagues and have one big league....just look at countries where soccer/football is better than any others (i.e. england, italy, brazil, etc...)

until next time....

Xyooj, I enjoy reading your thoughts.

Admitteldy, I have only lived in USA. But I have some thoughts after reading some of yours above.

FIFA is pretty much about getting paid. That is the driving sport organization in the world and one of the most powerful organizations in the world. I actually find FIFA's power to be a bit scarry sometimes. Yes, they want to regulate the game (as well they should). Yes, they want to try to help develop the game. But call me skeptical--that really has more to do with marketshare and not losing their influence.

Some things in USA can be assisted by implementing what takes place outside of our borders. Some other things just won't workl here. You lived here a long time. You realize that.

And there is politics in an awful lot of soccer/football federations in the world. FIFA has got to be one of the strongest organizations in the world. There are tremendous politics inside FIFA and many of the federations. USA doesn't have an exclusive trademark on that one.

Basketball is played on every continent as well, so I would argue that it--while not as popular as soccer/football is a "real global sport". So i think that whatever country manages to win that world championship have the right to be called world champions. I get your point but if we are going to go down that road...

USA is unlike most nations in the world that play the sport but we are not alone. Canada and Australia face some similar challenges. So do some of the Caribbean Islands and non-latin South American countries that are CONCACAF members. One size just doesn't fit all...

Even the historic powerhouses that you mentioned have their internal conflict and politics. Of course, any organization and unit's chances of success are usually improved if a majority of the members/players can come together and "buy in" to a plan.

We have a lot of work to do in USA...

For someone who says he's lived most of his life in the USA and appears to be a soccer person, you sure seem to have a naive view of things.

This is all about money. Completely and utterly about money. No matter how many times Eric Cantona or jw7 want to try to make it about heart and honor and dreams and all that esoteric crap, American soccer is the way it is because of money.

You'll have a hard time fighting that battle and molding American soccer (or even a tiny slice of it) into the kind of utopialike thing you appear to believe it can be or should be.

The fact is, that utopian ship sailed years ago in Europe, much less here. It doesn't really exist. Nobody does anything for the good of the game (except people who volunteer to coach little kids). Time you wise up and accept that. Or spent a sh!tload of your own money fighting it.

Yes, it is hard to argue the good of the game credentials of youth volunteer coaches. And while the game is indeed virtually all about money, I don't think that the utopian ship has been completely submerged yet. The supporters running AFC Wimbledon, Bucheon FC, FC United of Manchester, and Exeter City are doing so for little to no money against stupefying odds. I don't see a scenario like this playing out here any time soon though.

Yankiboy.....there are a lot of things about soccer in America that could be made to be better, but if USSF is the governing body perhaps it fail to see that soccer is not as popular as american footbabll, basketball, baseball or even hockey; these are direct competitors of soccer.

it's just ironic that the governing body would go around setting up so many different leagues/divisions....perhaps it's to just get as much money from each club/franchisee as possible? well, do you see McDonald's go setting up different sizes of McD's resturants....why do USSF do it? doesn't it realized that the real customers are the fans/people, not the franchisees?

it seems that travel expenses is one of the bigger outgoings, so why don't the USA have one big league and organise the clubs into divisions/conferences (i.e. northwest, southwest, central north, central south, northeast, southeast, etc...) to minimize travel costs? similar to what AFL/NFL use to do? To me, it makes sense to have such divisions/conferences so that the fans can attend the games. a game without an audience is just waste and generates no revenues. it's a domino effect, fans generates exposures, which generates revenues via sponsorships, TV deals, etc....look at the locations of USL clubs, USL map, make sense?

Bernie.....just because it has always been, doesn't mean it has to be....change is difficult for most, but change is the only factor that will make things better (or worst).

If there are more than 100 teams/clubs in the USL, I don't see why the owners of these cannot come together...are they really that lacking of insights/leaderships that they need a single entity to tell them what to do? base on reading many posts on this board, many are not happy with that entity....yet they too chicken to do anything about it. Say if you have a team and I have a team....do we need that entity so that we can play games together? ....do we need the USSF or FIFA to have a good game? to me governing organizations such as these are merely shells, acting like the police when the owners cannot themselve solve their disputes.....like the police, if our teams are paying them via a fee, then we expect them to be involved in our activities, else there are no use for them to exist.

the bottom line is that it's exposures that have the potentials to generate money. people/customers will come to the games, if it is marketed such that there is a value to them. I highly doubt that money is the problem, it's more of an attitude problem than it is money or a lack of understanding how to find ways to get the needed money. the sport is a product, it must be marketed with a value to the real consumers....and the consumers have choices, so better be better than those choices to earn they money.

you're probably wonder why ManU is owned by an American, but why did he not also own an MLS team? could it not that be exposures and status on the global market? think about it, the USA market is millions, but the world market is billions....any person with a brain can figure why not invest in the billions!

America has set standards for many things around the world, it can set standards for this sport too if some people in charge of the sport can only see beyond their toes/fingers.

USSF didn't "set up" these leagues.

What we now know as USL started with one league (an indoor league) back in 1986. It eventually added an outdoor (amateur) division, then a pro division, then a second pro division and a women's division. USSF didn't "set up" anything. It (as it can with its authority) designated the various leagues as having a certain status level.

And a bunch of wealthy investors "set up" Major League Soccer in 1994 to begin play in 1996.

USSF didn't "set up" anything. Again, you're opining about something you have precious little knowledge of.



Because every NFL team is of a certain level of quality of play and infrastructure. Every AFL team was, too. But there's a huge difference between the New England Revolution and the Western Mass Pioneers, and you can't just put them both in the same division just because they happen to play 82 miles apart. How can you not get this?



Why can they not attend games now?



Less sense than it used to, because we've gone from 30 or so top-flight clubs down to 11 and from more than 40 third-division clubs down to a handful.

Whether it's one entity (USL) or another (a league they set up), somebody has to be in charge, right? Someone has to provide the infrastructure, right? And most USL owners may gripe about how the league is run, but I still have yet to see the plan for them to run their own league.

And of the 100+ teams, the vast majority are amateur clubs with amateur front offices who have more dreams than actual wherewithal or funding. And 100+ teams means 100+ different opinions about how things should be done.




No, but unless you want to play each other 30 times, we're going to need some other teams.

And someone's going to have to set up the rules of the competition. And the infrastructure. And get officials. And enforce minimum standards. And resolve disputes. And all the things a league does that fanboys don't ever really consider.



Which they rarely can. Hence, governing bodies.



If you have a marketing plan, let's see it. We've heard all the crap for years about how it's marketing marketing marketing. It's NOT always marketing. At some point, it's the product and the market, not the marketing. There IS a market for professional soccer in this country. It's just not nearly as big as it is in other places. And the market for Division II or Division III or amateur or college soccer is even smaller than that. You can market all you want, but, first off, it's expensive if you want it to be effective, and second off, you're going to waste money marketing to a lot of people who have zero interest in your product and who never will have any interest in your product. Because, at the end of the day, it's still soccer. And the vast majority of Americans aren't interested.



So you just answered your own question, right? Glazer leveraged himself heavily to purchase ManU. People do it all the time. Owning ManU is a guaranteed revenue-generating brand (one that has lots of value even if it operates at a loss from year-to-year). At the time Glazer was either approached or not (depending on what you read) to take over Tampa Bay, MLS was not a particularly good investment. And, at this point, he owns his NFL team and ManU, I wouldn't expect you could get him (or Tom Hicks) to invest in MLS.



Again, we'd all love to see the plan, as long as it doesn't involve clapping our hands and wishing for Tinkerball the Fairy to save us all.

Yep. Glazer paid a mind boggling sum to purchase the ManUre brand. Just imagine how much he'll sell ManUre for one day?!? I'm sure there's a rich oil baron somewhere in the Middle East just itching to get his hands on brand ManUre and will pay a hefty sum -- people always have and always will pay a premium for ManUre. Money grubber Mr. Glazer will laugh all the way to the bank.

I do think it was a mistake for them to drop MLS. They should have rebranded the Mutiny -- bought the rights to the Rowdies name. I just don't think the Glazers are visionaries like Anschutz -- they are not into brand-building, but like buying existing brands and making them bigger. But I digress...

That one day better be soon. He's 81 years old.



Well....they disagreed.

hmm....perhaps you missing the point I'm trying to get across.
shell organization exist so it can provide directions if necessary, but such organization do not necessary determine nor have the authority to regulate/promote activities within the domain it was set up for.

somewhere you seem to said that such shell organization would be needed for a new league/club to exist, thru recognition. I'm just saying that it is not necessary, 'cause that shell organization would support any league/club that is improving the sport/activity that the shell was set up to govern.

as you said it yourself, MLS was set up and was supported by USSF and FIFA. Why would these organizations not supported another league/club to promote the sport?


oh...I haven't came on this forum claiming to be knowledgeable in America soccer, even though I did played soccer at the primary school clubs/leagues and little at the college level there decades ago.



going in circles.....regardless of percetion of quality/qualification by the owners/players, the judge is the customer!



what is the value to the customer for attending a soccer match? has soccer created a value to its customers in America?



it will continue to go down if it is the way it is....unless change comes along

on marketing, don't wait for one person to cook and just go sit on the table to eat

besides, you need to be inside the organization to make it work. just you and I out here talking, ain't going to make it work.

there is not that much interest in soccer because it needs to start early....at young ages. parents will get involve if their kids are involved and vice versa.

100+ minds should be better than a single mind. there are many cooperatives in america that works very well, why would it not work in this product?

well, if there is an audience to watch our two teams play 30 more games season-in season-out and we are still making money, then why stop playing? a good reason to stop would be if we got no audience and makes no money!

hmmm....by your posts, you seem to be one of those that don't like to rock the boat

Xyooj,

Get to know Bernie.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VWjq5WQtAvM

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bernie_Slaven

That was all in testimony in the MLS antitrust trial. Enjoy.

Past that, we can't have a conversation. You're coming from some alien perspective and trying to discuss this with you is like trying to explain a fungo to a Martian.

Evidently, he doesn't understand the difference between a club system and a franchise system, and that the USSF sanctions leagues that form, and sell franchises, rather than setting up leagues for existing clubs to join.

jw7....
thanks for the links. if he's the real "bernie" online here I would expect he has a deeper understanding of the game. he doesn't seem to either want to fix/improve nor destroy the existing system. in a way, it's somewhat good that he plays the devil's advocate on both directions.


bernie....
thanks for the links of the trial. read the first, and seem very good stuffs. you and I are on the same planet, but we're looking at a product from different angles, perhaps you're too inside to see the outside?

davidp.....
if I was in control of MLS, I won't change a thing. if USSF wants to improve the sport on the world stage, perhaps it needs to look at how other countries are doing. to merely said that certain things just don't work in the USA is a lame excuse. it's a really a shame that a global sport like soccer/football is so poorly run in America, one of the most advanced nations in the world can't run such a popular sport. Go out of the USA and look back in, it may opens your mind/eyes to how other see you.

until next time....

after reading that first opening statement, lawsuit against MLS,

USSF wouldn't be in trouble if it did not team up with Rothenberg to create MLS. For USSF to be reputable, it should stay neutral and promote the sport....not only to support teams/leagues that it would have financial gains.

There is nothing wrong with individuals coming together to create a product and market to the world. What USSF seem to have done is like a judge already decide the charged person is already guilty regardless of what the jury will decide or the case will show.

sure organizations such as USSF and FIFA seem to have such power over the sport of soccer, that's because everyone is bowing to them. it's like water, if you're going to drink from their well then you have to obey their rules. there are water everywhere so do you necessary need to drink those from their well? The have power to regulate the sport because no one else is opposing them and letting do what they want..

until next time...

No, that's not it at all.

I just don't believe in Pollyanna everything is doable bull****. The forces you're railing against are too set and too powerful to be changed easily...if at all.

You want to go against FIFA, knock yourself out. Be prepared for a long, drawn-out battle that will drain you of everything you have and hold dear. These people will NOT take kindly to anyone putting their hands in their pockets.

You simply don't understand that what you think should work doesn't and won't work. And you refuse to see it.

Knock yourself out.

The existing power structure is (largely) corrupt, there's no question. And it is most assuredly NOT "for the good of the game," as it says it is.

I'm only saying you have no chance to change it. Unless when Blatter dies, someone more progressive takes over. And I don't know if that's realistic.

I think I'm starting to understand Bernie better.

Listening to a few of his radio shows has helped me to understand his point of view. He is one of the most passionate fans you'll every find (he must have a lot passion to do that radio show everyday and put up with guys like Bert... lol). He (like most people) has just become a bit frustrated over the years.

I think it's like most any business/sports: The more you know about it, the more you wished you didn't know. Passion and knowledge don't always go together well. The knowledge part kinda takes the shine off of things.

Xyooj- "he doesn't seem to either want to fix/improve nor destroy the existing system"
I think it's the exact opposite, he's also looking for some type of answer??
That's why he reads and responds to each and every one of these sport development type of posts.

Xyooj- "it's somewhat good that he plays the devil's advocate on both directions".
Which always creates more discussion = new ideas (even if all us USL fans tend to produce them in a very raw form).

Ether that, or he's part of the English football CIA...

I wish there was an answer, to be honest with you.

I don't believe there is one. The FIFA/USSF way, which has gotten us to where we are now - not perfect by any means, but light-years ahead of where we were 20 years ago. Maybe we're here despite them, I don't know.

Or the go out on your own way, which no one has ever been able to pull off. If the TOA or whatever it's called thinks they can do it, go for it. Frankly, I think many of you overestimate the abilities of these people to run a league, given that not all of them have proven yet that they can run a successful franchise.

You say you want a revolution? We'd all love to see the plan.

I do not know that I have encountered someone here who believes the TOA can run an entire league. It is all well and good for the TOA to argue that the current model is unworkable or amateurish, it is another thing entirely to start a new league that isn't also both of those things.

If everyone was being completely honest they would admit that a split between USL-1 and TOA is mutually assured destruction. Work something out that benefits both sides. It is not possible to get a new league off the ground before next season, even if the framework was largely in place, which it isn't. And how many of the TOA owners will be willing to eat all or most of their initial investment? More than zero?

The TOA really should glance over at WPS. It took years for completely competent people to get that league up and running. It ran relatively smoothly and the league presented what it had to offer in a professional manner. The first season was a qualified success and many teams still hemorrhaged money. If WPS survives long enough to be stable it will be because some very wealthy people prop it up in the interim.

Quite frankly, it's less of a problem what anybody here thinks and more of a problem if the TOA thinks it can just create a league out of whole cloth in the next six months. And it sounds like they think they can.

http://cdn.cloudfiles.mosso.com/c58802/KG-09-21-09.mp3

Aaron Davidson: Pro soccer is still in the diaper stages in the U.S....the TOA will not have farm teams to MLS.

Vancouver, Miami, Atlanta, Tampa will not play fiddle to any MLS team.

If the team owners will not get control over the league..Miami will not play next year in USL.

Somehow this does not strike me as a very effective threat.

We should all be so lucky.

What kind of crack me up more than anything (other than the Brazilians and Miami FC threatening to walk) is the fact that Miami sees to be really salty about not getting USL help to fend off MLS incursion into the glorious pro soccer marketplace that is known as the greater Miami area.

Except, the way I understood it--Traffic ownership was trying to explore the possibility of getting in on the Claure-Spaniard deal to bring MLS.

And just a week or so ago, wasn't it Davidson or some other Miami FC director that was reported to be in NYC meeting with MLS?

Seems like an awful lot of posturing going on...

anyone have any updates? I know that there were some phone meetings sqceduled for last week...as time drags on if the USL doesn't announce something definative should we assume that there will be both a USL1 and USL2 in 2010?

Excellent points Yankiboy & I concur~! - But I;m curious too... I can't speak for Battery owners of course but FOREVER they have consistently expressed that The Battery will be loyal to the USL as long as there IS a USL.

Is no news good news?

I haven't posted anything for over a week because there really hasn't been anything to post. I posted last week reluctantly and now wish I had not because I really didn't have a lot to go on.

This past week I've heard stories of TOA asking money from the 8 teams to start a league to a USL rumor they were spreading that everything was all patched up and a press release would be made last Friday. The reality is, everyone has been quite and no one knows.

But in the end, I would have to agree, that the longer this goes on, the more likely it is that these teams will be back in the USL in 2010. Which is most likely the best scenario for all parties.

I second that. This does not strike me as an ideal time to start a new league, particularly as it seems obvious that a framework is not in place.

To expand briefly on the Not A Good Time For New Leagues theme, daily reading of the Guardian has informed me that in recent weeks one EPL team could not pay its players and another faces administration. Clubs in League One, League Two and the Blue Square Premier face the very real possibilty of extinction. Louise Taylor made the entirely plausible argument yesterday that League Two may have to go semi-professional. This is what is happening in a football mad country.

The business world has contracted and the football world is following suit. I hope that the parties involved in the USL and TOA dispute are keeping this in mind.

Soccer America says 2009 MLS avg attendance down 2.6%. w/o Seattle would be down 9 percent. (MLB for comparison, down avg 6.7%)

http://www.corussports.com/soccer/nouvelles/l-avenir-de-l-impact-qui-dit-vrai-1808421.html

Suggests that negotiations have ended without a settlement and the two parties are going separate ways. Also with an audio clip from Papadakis.

The next week should be fun.

Thanks for the link. Fun is only one of the many words that come immediately to mind.

I hope the TOA is planning on keeping things manageably small to begin with.

Report: Whitecaps, Impact will not return to USL in 2010

http://www.tsn.ca/soccer/story/?id=296379

Hope that Saputo knows what he is doing. The Whitecaps were already a lock to go so this just makes it sooner as opposed to later.

Nice knowing ya, Canucks.
Godspeed.

Not so fast!!! Thee posturing continues..

http://www.nationalpost.com/sports/cbc/story.html?id=2000330863#ixzz0VL7jPNx4

In every article I've seen since yesterday, they claim Atlanta Silverbacks and St. Louis Soccer United are "USL Clubs".

This is factually incorrect and should be amended. Should be refereed to as something like "...as well as interested investors in Atlanta and St. Louis."

Uslsoccer.com just put up a story praising Canada and announced they "are planning on opening a full-service Canada USL office in 2010 to work with our teams and the Canadian Soccer Association more closely in continued development of the sport"

http://www.uslsoccer.com/home/378527.html

This has turned into a fine case study regarding why it is inadvisable to make a public statement when the content of that statement might be modified or backed away from before the day if over.