What is Pro Rel? - A Primer for the Uninformed American Sports Fan - What is Promotion Relegation?

What is Promotion Relegation? What is Pro Rel? Should US Soccer Federation force Pro Rel on MLS?
Today we set the stage for the uninformed American sports fan that has never heard of Pro/Rel. I was in this boat just a few years ago. I had no idea teams could move up and down leagues.
As I've grown more in love with soccer/football around the world, the more I've fallen in love with promotion relegation. Once you have an understanding of its power it leaves other sports leagues -- namely all the American ones -- a bit behind. Instead of rewarding success, American sports leagues reward mediocrity. (See: Cleveland Browns!)
This isn't a deep dive -- so feel free to let me know what I missed in the comments so I can address it in another video.
***
Become a Patron: / grayhairgaming
***
Join the Gray Hair Gaming Community Discord: / discord
***
Follow me on Twitter: / grayhairgaming
***

[@jacob9925]

This would make the MLS much better

[@jaselucian8563]

I know it is kinda randomly asking but does anybody know a good website to watch newly released tv shows online?

[@kyngahmed3667]

@Jase Lucian i would suggest Flixzone. You can find it on google =)

[@davepazz580]

Replacing one bad team with another bad team every year will not male MLS better...

[@safeysmith6720]

@@davepazz580 some teams escape from that

[@neasden112]

MAN EVEN OUR SUNDAY LEAGUE TEAMS HAVE PROMOTION/RELEGATION. its was annoying getting relegated last year, but we got promoted this year.

[@GrayHairGaming]

I think that can happen in local leagues so that one team doesn’t constantly destroy the rest of the competition, but I’d say at most we are talking 3 levels. Can your Sunday league eventually get promoted into the County Leagues/etc and then to Vanarama? That’d be the key difference :(

[@RifqiMainGitar]

I'm not American, and I don't get the American sports (handegg, basketball, baseball) system. You can't have a tie result from a game but you praise the biggest loser of the season by giving the first draft pick for the next season.

[@michaelstein7510]

The idea is so that the worst teams have a chance to get better by getting first access to the young talent. It doesn't always work, of course, but it's a good idea in theory to ensure parity. We don't want bad teams staying bad forever, but it still happens with some teams like the Cleveland Browns.

[@stevenygabbyperez695]

The American systems are modern and the health of the league is most important part. In Europe it's more about the club's. By giving the worst team the highest pick you promote parody. This is why EPL has only 4 different champions since 1996 when the MLS started. The least winner in the U.S. is the NBA with 9 and the other two top league's had 12 and so did the MLS.

[@y2j11000]

The MLS should be like the nba system

[@klaze9318]

Its a random pick, but they get a higher percent so they can at least have a chance so they can get better and the season and league get better.

[@quabenathalamus510]

Michael Stein parity 🤔 in a cycle fashion . Worst teams suck for sometime get good players and just when they are ready to compete the former good teams with aging squads start to suck so they fall off and the cycle continues . Cycle parity ? That’s fun ? 🤦🏿‍♀️

[@skidawg22]

This is a very good explanation of how pro/rel works. As far as soccer is concerned, FIFA bylaws specifically call for it. With Australia being pushed towards a pro/rel system and Canada (with its upcoming Canadian Premier League as the top league) working towards such a system, the US is the only FIFA country not only not supporting pro/rel but actively demonizing those of us who want such a system. As a result of NASL situation, all of the #ProRelForUSA advocates have effectively been pushed into "non-league" territory, concentrating around the NPSL and the UPSL (the latter of which has internal regional pro/rel). I think, in order for US soccer to be even remotely respected, let alone competitive, pro/rel has to happen.

[@IkeOkerekeNews]

FIFA sucks. Let sports develop the way they want to.

[@davepazz580]

FIFA's rules don't apply to MLS because MLS teams are *not* independent clubs... they are franchises that are created by the league and can *only* exist as part of MLS.

[@davidday2373]

"Demonizing" really? We don't Relegation, that's it. You weirdos keep pushing it onto us, when we're fine without it. We like Playoffs, we like relative Parity, we like stability, we like simple... no need for Promotion-Relegation

[@davidday2373]

​@@IkeOkerekeNewsSounds like FIFA is a "cartel"

[@rangersking6699]

You are really teasing us on the pro/rel video lol

[@GrayHairGaming]

I'm going to break down how it would work, problems I see w/pro/rel in the US, etc over several videos. Big topic, tons of angles. Thought it was important for non-experts to at least have an idea first. How have you been?

[@rangersking6699]

Gray Hair Gaming I understand

[@RudyCantGame]

Would be nice to have such a system in American leagues (any sport, NBA especially)

[@GrayHairGaming]

I mean... the Browns... really... it just stands out to me so much. They are so, so, so bad. They deserve to get relegated. Makes me feel bad for those 1st round picks who go to Cleveland and have their careers ruined by such a bad team.

[@RudyCantGame]

Gray Hair Gaming well, 76ers made it no secret that they tanked for 5 season.

[@GrayHairGaming]

True. Another example of rewarding mediocrity.

[@oak8026]

Finally, i have been waiting for this video.

[@GrayHairGaming]

I'm going to break down how it would work, problems I see w/pro/rel in the US, etc over several videos. Big topic, tons of angles.

[@oak8026]

Sounds great. Also, i would like to see maybe a collaboration with another U.S soccer type of person. Maybe the likes of a Jimmy Conrad or Heath Pierce. Would be interesting to see, and although I am not a KZbinr I am pretty sure collaboration is a great way to get more views and activity on your channel. Just an idea, again i am not an expert at all.

[@GrayHairGaming]

No you're right. I need to work on that side for sure. Part of that is me getting ahead enough on content that I can think straight. That's step one. But I'm working on it. To be fair, not sure Jimmy Conrad (117k subs!) would be interested in collaborating with someone of my size, but that idea in general is a good one.

[@oak8026]

Gray Hair Gaming Hey, it may be worth a shot! But I think anyone you can have on the channel to debate about US soccer would be good, whether it’s a channel with 100k subs or 100 subs

[@edwincitomeza]

Nice informational vid man my question is if pro rel becomes a thing what happens to the MLS SuperDraft and college soccer like who would the draft picks go to since the worst teams are going down and will it even be worth going to college? Anyway tho keep up the great vids👍

[@TheSilDante]

If you want to become a pro football player the worst thing is to go to college. Look at Pulisic, who looks like he is the most talented US player ever. He never played in college, he went to Europe and developed into a very good young player.

[@happilyeggs4627]

The richest, most valuable game, in world football, is the English Championship Play Off Final. It's worth upward of 100 million to the club that wins the final.

[@oggyoggyoggyoioioi7147]

I can see this from both side's. Fleetwood Town is a perfect example of promotion a team can go from the very bottom of the english football pyramid to near the top. I believe they had had 7 promotions in about 10-12 years, going from the NWCFL playing the likes of Atherton L.R to League 1 (3rd tier) playing former premier league teams like Charlton athletic and Portsmouth and as of next season Sunderland but it is important to know your level, plenty have teams have gone bust trying to compete at a level they simply do no have income or fan support to compete at. My local side Leigh RMI faced this problem, playing at the local 10,000 capacity rugby stadium but only averaging crowds 400 in the conference (5th tier) , we would finish in or around the relegation zone but would end up staying up because either a promoted team didn't have the ground capacity requirements or a team who finished above us would be kicked out. Nobody was intrested in a losing team so it was hard to get fans in until we finally got relegated (twice in a row) . We had a brief revival and changed our name to leigh genesis but thats along story. We eventually folded in 2013.

[@sweetmapleleafs]

Never thought I'd see the day where Jerry Seinfeld is telling us about pro/rel in the MLS of all leagues...

[@ainahko16]

Here's my idea for pro/rel for US Soccer. It will be split season format like what Liga MX has. Round one of the regular season will start on February immediately the week after the Super Bowl until mid June. And then after the international summer break or the World Cup, round two will start on mid July until November. Which ever team in both the Eastern and Western division has the most game points overall in the first round will be rewarded a spot in the divisional championship. Overall winners in round 2 of both East and West divisions will earn a spot to face the overall winners of round one. Winners from the Eastern and Western Championship will face each other for the MLS Cup. For relegation, nearing the end of round 2 of the regular season, the best teams from both East and West in division 2 moves up and the worst of division 1 goes down. However (this part sounds gimmicky), the second best of division 2 East or West will face the the second worst team of division one to determine if the division 2 team gets promoted or the worst team in division 1 will stay for next season. If anyone has anything better than my proposal, feel free to reply. Peace!

[@GrayHairGaming]

I like it!

[@oggyoggyoggyoioioi7147]

An F.A cup style tournament would be a good start. Give the amateurs/semi pro teams a chance of playing the MLS teams. Regionalise the rounds up until the final 32. Add the MLS teams in the the round before its de-regionalised somehow. Would be a great way to spot real talent and area's that can attract big crowds for soccer. Infact this idea could work in any american sport

[@GrayHairGaming]

Have you heard of the US Open Cup? That’s the essential idea.

[@oggyoggyoggyoioioi7147]

Gray Hair Gaming I haven't. Do the MLS teams enter it? How far down the leagues does it go?. Sorry if I seem ignorant, i have a good knowledge on most football leagues thanks to football manger. I never did the MLS because i couldnt get my head around the squad rules. Anyway great video. Hope you can convince your fellow countrymen that soccer is the way to go

[@Lonestarr022]

@@oggyoggyoggyoioioi7147 MLS Clubs (in the United States) enter in the 4th round (Round of 32). not sure how far down it goes, but they do have local qualifiers as far as small clubs go.

[@Aasinp]

Are you going to post a new video about the US Soccer president?

[@GrayHairGaming]

Yup... US soccer videos come out on Thursdays, so expect it then at 10am Eastern

[@tchujdenetza]

Hello, Gray Hair Gaming! A fan from Europe. I have a much different concept for US Leagues that will make soccer covered all over USA including promotion/relegation. That will end MLS, but will make USA First Division far more interesting. In essence it is driving US Football/Soccer just like football is Europe. As you know almost all European countries have their own leagues. Exceptions are super minnows like country of Monaco (where the Team plays in French league) and Lichtenstein (where teams play in Swiss lower divisions). Imagine if Soccer in USA is run like Europe. USA is bigger than Europe in size and comparable as population (320:500 million is not a huge of a difference). The only bigger countries are Canada (which will soon have their own league) and Russia which has one league with teams located in continental Europe, which makes their teams relatively close to each other. Now, imagine this! Each US State has it's own football/soccer league. Every State Soccer Federation will decide how many teams will participate in League 1. It is logical that superstates in terms of population and financial strength like Texas and California should have far more teams than smaller states like New Hampshire or Rhode Island. Therefore it would make sense if Texas and California have more divisions and more teams in first division than New Hampshire or Rhode Island. Of course every State Soccer Federation will decide how many teams will be promoted and relegated between D1 & D2, between D2 & D3 and so on and so forth. Let us as well remove Hawaii and the great state of Alaska for that matter. Why? Because Alaska is quite away and quite cold. If they want they can have their own soccer league and have winners be crowned Champion of Alaska. Hawaii is insanely away so there is no way they participate in US Championship, but they can have their soccer league too and have Champions of Hawaii. So we are left with 48 States which is a perfect number. On top of that they are relatively close to each other compared to Alaska or Hawaii. Now imagine this. Every year all teams in all Divisions 1 in all 48 States play each other 2 times - one home and one away. At the end of the season whomever needs to get relegated gets relegated, whomever needs to get promoted gets promoted. But most importantly the best teams of D1 that finished first, second, third will have the opportunity to become the Champions of the USA! In this case you would have inclusion and opportunity for all to develop talent and improve throughout the years! How can that work? There are couple of options: 1. We select the top 16 States in terms of size and population (like Texas and California) and they are awarded with 2 teams. So these states will bring 32 teams. And we take the rest States that are smaller in size and population (like Iowa, New Hampshire or Rhode Island) and they get awarded 1 team. That makes US D1 of 64 Teams. Then it will be play-offs with elimination after 2-games series (home and away) that will end with a final that will determine US Champion. The final four will qualify for Concacaf Champions League. So, in this scenario we will have 11 games that will determine US Champion after the State D1 is over. 2. We select relatively few superstates (like 3-4) to have 4 teams in the US competition and vast amount of medium/sized big states with 3 or 2 teams respectively and give only 1 team to super minnows like New Hampshire or Rhode Island. At the end of the day when D1 Leagues finish in all 48 States within the same weekend we will have US D1 of 128 Teams which will compete with exactly the same way as option 1, but we will have twice more teams having the chance of being Champion of USA with only 2 games more, which basically mean 13 games after your State Championship is over. This will make US D1 like the Champions League where every game is a FINAL! That means that even in huge States like California and Texas L1 should have relatively few teams. For instance if they have 20 teams each that means that they have to play 38 games just in their state + 11 games to become Champions of USA + all Open Cup Games + Concacaf Champions League Games. It will be impossible to handle such schedule. So they have personal interest to have optimum amount of teams that are as many as possible to compete in D1, but as less as possible so that players can handle the schedule. Now, let's imagine that the Top Teams of each league plays a bunch of amateurs in US Open Cup and they have to play average of 5-7 games in this competition, before being eliminated and winning it all. Let's imagine as well that the 4 Teams that qualify for Concacaf Champions League have to play 4-8 games in this tournament. This adds 9 to 15 games more disregarding the State league and the US D1 League. Now, imagine we go with scenario 2 which means 13 games if you are good enough to win the whole thing or go to the final. In both cases you will play in Concacaf Champions League. That alone guarantees at least 22 games without the State League. So, in this case it wouldn't make any sense even for super states like California and Texas to have more than 12 teams in their L1 as 12 teams will mean 22 games throughout regular season. This system would make US Championship practically US Champions League! It will create insentive for every investor to start a team in any state, knowing that he can climb to D1 of the State and that this team can eventually become Champion of USA or finish within the last 4 and go to Concacaf Champions League, eventually win it and go to Club World Cup playing against Real Madrid, Barcelona or Manchester United. And eventually becoming Champion of the World. Tell me what you think.

[@andygarcia527]

Cramming so much games into one season doesnt seem likely, but I do like the idea of the 11 game playoff.

[@rangersking6699]

Made it this time

[@vitanus]

Its so funny that 3 years ago Americans had little to no clue what Pro/Rel is, while over in Europe every kid from the age of 6 dreams of getting promoted so they could play in a higher youth league ;) We learn to love this system from a very young age

[@davepazz580]

The difference is here there is a clear divide between what is the top league and anything below it... top league teams forever keep that status, but it's the players that are either deserving of playing for a top league team or not.

[@invertedname3099]

So many lower level teams fail financially in America as fans turn easily here. If we had pro/rel then those teams would always have a shot to get to the top leagues and maybe cause fans to stick around. It’s a win / win

[@davepazz580]

Highly doubtful...

[@discodavid26]

The American /mls system kinda has a yearly half promotion relegation in that your either a playoff team or not … and then that can switch around the next season however …it leaves too many regular season dead rubber matches towards the end off the season between bottom half/quarter teams for my liking … while European leagues have the race for the title as do mls for top quarter off league teams it has a bit more on it then “best regular season team” just below them you have the race for “European competition places down to bottom off the top 3rd off the league which I would say is like for like off fighting for a playoff slot… but where European leagues leave American Leagues for dust (even in years when league winners is obvious) is the bottom 3rd /quarter fighting for every single point until last day off the season in order to stay in the division off its league championship … yes European leagues especially outside the top five soccer national domestic leagues have it share off end off season dead rubbers but only really between 2 mid table teams and overall I’ll say European leagues have far fewer off them …… only thing I would say in defence off American sports leagues is they are covering a huge area ( only Brazil Russia and china can relate) and indeed the uefa champions league covers a similar geographic area and has a similar format each year to say a nfl season off mini league then knockouts playoffs (over 2 legs though over then final) only real difference though is then each teams had its own domestic season on top off ucl fixtures as well. Also while I’m not a big fan off the draft system in American sports I love the effect off “near parity “ it creates over a league that over then a more equal share off television Money is had to recreate anywhere else in the team sports leagues world European or not.

[@discodavid26]

Also I say in order for USA soccer to have pro / rel it would have to either 1of 2 situations 1 it be the nation divided into 2/3 or 4 separate regions with all providing teams for concacaf competitions as if they were separate countries … each region would in itself be run like England domestic tiers 1-5 “tower block pyramid “ or 2nd situation is have a “wide pure pyramid “ to only have the 1 coast to coast nationwide league ( let’s call it mls tier 1 ) that sits above 2 equal east and west mls tier 2 leagues that both promote teams up to tier 1 and take teams that come down.… in seasons that only eastern teams go down from tier 1 the east tier 2?would have to shuffle a team or two over to west tiet 2 league etc etc.…if we expanded from these 3 leagues over two tiers we could eventually get to 7 leagues over 3 tiers so the tier 3 leagues off north west/north east /south west/south east that are promoting and relegating to/from the west and east tier 2 leagues that are in themselves below tier 1 national league.

[@OldLadyPlays]

The example from American sport I'd have used would be baseball, with its pyramidal structure of minor-league teams. The winners compete for the World Series, the losers have to go down to AAA, with the best AAA teams coming up. The main problem I see with it is the travel situation; I doubt any soccer division below MLS would make enough to pay the travel costs of being in a nationwide league. And ramping up their administrative operations to handle the logistics of that travel schedule would be costly for teams promoted. Not saying I'm against it, I think it would greatly improve the quality of the football being played by and in the US.

[@GrayHairGaming]

Size of the country/travel costs does factor in. But I think it is doable. More in future videos. Good point on baseball. Not the biggest fan so it didn't come to mind. Plus the Browns are so so so bad... seems the shining example of rewarding mediocrity to me.

[@philipginter7606]

If you have divisions ie SE, NE Midwest, NW, SW for the lower tiers have the top teams in a playoff for the promotion spots. Or a playoff for the top in the east and west have the bottom team from east and west relagated.

[@chrismellow3947]

This is pretty much what exists in England as below level 6 it is split into North and South and even more split down the lower you go (see here for a handy visual reference: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/English_football_league_system#The_system). In the US a regional league system would likely kick in slightly earlier just due to the sheer size of the country (probably around level 3 or 4) which would require some creativity to manage promotion and relegation between those levels but I can't imagine it would be too complicated.

[@OldLadyPlays]

Not sure why you'd think I don't know about England; I'm English. Anyway, you could fit England into New England. The scale is not imaginable for people in the UK, generally, until you come here. A third division match between Edmonton and Charleston would require three flights, one of them international, no matter which direction you went. That's *expensive*. I don't believe that clubs below MLS would make enough money to be able to afford that kind of flight. It's just a reality that Americans don't support minor-league teams as much as they do the major-league ones. Ask someone in Div II NCAA football, or AA baseball, or the Canadian Professional Basketball League. And those are well-established games, in well-established leagues. No way is any second division (assuming MLS as first div) going to earn enough for its teams to allow a national structure. Not without MASSIVE capital, and I don't know where they get that for minor-league soccer in the tight US sports market. I'd love to see it happen and succeed, I just don't think it can.

[@chrismellow3947]

My bad, but then again it's a handy reference for grey hair if he's reading and wants, like I said, a handy reference. I lived in Providence for a few years so I have a decent enough grasp of US geography to know, again as I said, a regional league would be necessary far earlier than in the UK. The current East/West Conference dynamic of not just the MLS but also the NASL and USL serves as a useful model and then further down the pyramid a more regional approach similar to the Conference setup of FBS football (note similar, not identical). I agree that this is tough to imagine, particularly with the crowded sports market in the US, as well as many other factors (most notably player recruitment).

[@davidlemmon4603]

For some reason, many soccer fans can not seem to comprehend the very basic structure of a Franchise Model in a closed league. Every American professional sports league is a Franchise Model which means it's a BUSINESS and the owners paid money to buy into the league... They don't want their team relegated to some community league. It works in the NFL and other professional leagues and its fine for MLS also... HOWEVER, maybe MLS could create a few spots for teams to get promoted/relegated into... But the original teams should be legacy teams that are grandfathered. This would be a nice compromise for those pro/rel advocates.

[@GrayHairGaming]

David I think it has 0% to do with not comprehending a franchise model structure. I think most pro/rel advocates understand -- and disdain -- that model. I think most franchise-model fans seem to lack comprehension around pro/rel; many Americans have never heard of it because our leagues don't use it. It works for NFL because no one else plays American football. If you want to make the argument that "the other leagues use it" then you can't ignore that 99% of all other soccer leagues in the world have a pro/rel model. I'm not ignoring the fact owners paid a lot of money to get into MLS. Not looking to pull the rug out from underneath them. But I think you can make the transition to pro/rel, increase media rights value through pro/rel, and enrich owners while growing the game with pro/rel. The alternative (no pro/rel) is soccer doesn't grow beyond the 24-28 cities that MLS deems profitable at any given time. Given the size of the country you could have hundreds of teams created (not immediately, over time) in a pro/rel model. Good for the game, good for opportunity for players, good for the national team, and good business.

[@davidlemmon4603]

I respect your passion for pro/rel but there are great arguments for and against. Ultimately, the Franchise model works which is evident by NFL, NBA, Etc... The current model has stability and investors are interested in pouring in the cash... ON A SIDE NOTE, I would be interested in some kind of pro/rel compromise where the current teams are protected but maybe 10 additional spots are made into a pro/rel league slots... Then these little teams could battle into Division 1 and become a Cinderella story... BUT it is only fair that investors that sunk $150 million into Division 1 do not have the rug ripped out from underneath them. You interested in using your creative abilities to advocate for this compromise?

[@alliedatheistalliance6776]

I'm a UK fan and tbh I like the way the MLS is run, it's refreshingly different. Here's my case against pro/rel in the US and Canada. The physical geography involved means a Division 1, 2, 3 type system is innefficient. Players (and fans) have to travel too far for each game, it costs money and tires players. It's also just interesting to see football done differently than everywhere else. As a Hockey fan I can appreciate the American way of doing things, even calling it 'soccer' which I'm getting used to now. The draft keeps the league exciting, rather than ending up in the La Liga or PL situation with 2 or 3 teams dominating the league every single year. Look at Scotland for a classic example, the league is won almost without exception by one of two teams, who then make more money to buy better players and win again the next year. Not to mention with that success they attract more fans to support them, and thus make more money, etc. The MLS is a genuinely open-ended competition, literally anyone could win it, and that comes down to tactics and players abilities rather than just throwing money around. Also it's worth bearing in mind that every league structure ends somewhere, it's never just an infinite ladder down to sunday league teams etc. English football is a closed system broken down into divisions. As the MLS builds up teams, I think they should split into North West, North East, South West, SouthEast, with the winners and maybe runners up entering either a mini 'superleague' or knock out competition at the end of the season, sort of a soccer 'superbowl'but not just a one off game but an additional short competition. This means all local rivalries can remain, possibly even intensify, and they stil have something to fight for, the 'soccerbowl' or whatever it gets called. This could almost happen right now if some NASL and USL teams were brought into MLS. Please let me know what you think, thanks. Go Rapids!

[@onedarthyear726]

1. you could make it so that division 2 or 3 is NE,NW,SW and Se 2. you can keep the draft, if only the first division is national. if it is more than 1, just add the teams that are in a national division to the draft

[@stevenygabbyperez695]

I'm a new fan to soccer. I've started watching a lot more this year when Zlatan came to L.A. I have discovered that the league has a lot of parity and a lot of very fun teams to watch. There have been 12 different champions (Not including supporters shield winners) since the league started in 1996. In that time EPL has had 4 champions I believe. MLS has great fans and is so exciting to watch. Like you i think it's good that we have a different system. The academy system is in place and developing. Atlanta United just called up George Bello, a 16 year old acadamy player that looks like he will be very good in this league at least and could developer into a player that can play in the top league's. I think in the next 10 years MLS will be a top 5 league and in the 20 years it can compete with some of the top league's. I can't wait until we have teams that can pay with the like of Liverpool or Real Madrid, buy even if we could have a team as good as Everton it Tottenham I think will be amazing.

[@StrongKickMan]

you think that it is interesting that for example southhampton sucks for years and would be allowed to stay in the prem ? that is simply bs

[@Lonestarr022]

@@StrongKickMan Instead of maybe kicking them out because they suck, you look at why they suck and have the tools to fix it. If they had as fair an opportunity to sign and draft players that were better, like how MLS and other north american sports do things, maybe they wouldn't suck, maye they and clubs like them could actually contend and win trophies.. Pro/rel does not allow for clubs to do this.

[@GilbertoBrea]

We are in the show business not the sport business.

[@timmatthew3887]

😣 *sigh* I feel like Jeremiah here. Ain’t no one listening to me, about why this is Bad for U.S. Soccer. There’s this fundamental misunderstanding about why Pro/Rel exists overseas, and why, in a purely business sense, it won’t work here. Our soccer doesn’t need to look like or function like the rest of the world’s soccer in order for us to be a player on the world stage. Now, our player development needs tweaking, and no having pro/rel isn’t going to fix that either. What will are free Academies set up by top tier clubs, and working closely with club, and school teams to identity potential future talent. Pro/rel isn’t a magic bullet. It’s not going to fix all the ills that plague the game here, and in fact it may actually pull the game backwards losing ground we have gained.

[@GrayHairGaming]

But that's the point. Our player development needs tweaking... or a completely overhaul. 22, 24, 28 franchises cannot cover the United States. It's not possible. More clubs = more youth academies = more impact on youth development. There is no business incentive for clubs to set up academies. American youth players are signing with German teams, in the Netherlands, elsewhere on a free transfer. The club gets nothing from that. So if you're the club, why invest in the youth academies if you can lose your complete investment on a really good player who should be playing in Europe?

[@TheSilDante]

"What will are free Academies set up by top tier clubs" you're 10000% right with that particular statement, but overall you're wrong. A pro/rel system need a league structure, that requires a shitton of teams. And that is what you need to develop talent. You need multiple clubs in any place all over the country. And more than just 20-30 of these teams have to be professional. In Germany we have 82m citizens and 25k football clubs. We have probably more than 100 professional or semi-professional teams. You need these teams, because they are developing young talent. Pro/Rel gives these small clubs chances to raise within the system, get more money, hire better coaches and develop better players.

[@StrongKickMan]

@ tim matthew . If you have no Relegation there is no need for the last placed team in a league to try . they know they will stay in the best league even if they lose everything . When you know there is a second tier league Team which is better than the worst major league team , wouldn'T you think they should swap ?

[@davepazz580]

*If you have no Relegation, there is no need for the last placed team in a league to try* False... Everyone who makes it to the professional ranks as an athlete feels the need to *always* try to perform... otherwise, they know their job will be on the line no matter how the team places. *they know they will stay in the best league even if they lose everything* False... The *team* will stay in the best league, yes... but that same luxury is *not* afforded to the players and coaches, they are perfectly capable of either being fired or sent down to the minor leagues. *When you know there is a second-tier league Team which is better than the worst major league team* How do you know they are "better"? A second-division team is *still* just a second-division team regardless of where they finish on the table... finishing first in an inferior league doesn't magically transform them into a top league quality team. *Wouldn't you think they should swap?* No... instead that last-place team should acquire new players and coaches and try again.

[@nosaints88]

Yeah I wish we had a fair system where performance meant something. You can win the 2nd division title 50 times in a row and you're not going up unless you pay MLS $200 Million; you can be dead last in MLS every year and get rewarded for it lol. That's like if you went to work and did absolutely nothing and then got a raise. Like "yeah I know you're our best employee, but this other guy that does nothing needs the money more than you, so he gets the raise."

[@Lonestarr022]

but most of ULS's teams don't have the fanbase or meet the facility standards or have the money to play in MLS. That is way they have to pay 200 million, Clubs with Strong markets and fanbases can potentially make that money back in a matter of time. If you just let any team in, you would have teams playing on levels they are not suited to play in, and many would fold like an accordion.

[@davepazz580]

By your logic then, boxing isn't "fair" either because you could be the middleweight champion but you'll never be given the chance to "move up" another weight class automatically to win *that* title... MLS owners *paid* to enjoy the financial privilege of having a team in the top league and they keep enjoying it by virtue of keeping their teams financially profitable... what they players and coaches do on the field is another matter entirely. So your claim "that's like if you went to work and did absolutely nothing and then got a raise." is nonsense... only the players and coaches have to concern themselves with winning games, the owners have to concern themselves with winning *fans* which is an entirely different objective.

[@davepazz580]

@6:26 - *We reward people who do well, except in our sports leagues where we reward people who don't do well with the best players coming into the system the next year... that doesn't make any sense.* Would it instead make sense to reward the top team with the best players coming into the system the next year? Looking at it from the perspective of the league as a whole, no it would not... The difference between American sports leagues and European soccer leagues is that in Europe and elsewhere, they are dealing with fully independent "clubs" who live and can potentially die by their own hand... relegated teams or even clubs financially dying off bears little impact on the business of the entire league as a whole, since soccer is the king sport of those countries. Not so in the US... top league teams losing fans and getting into financial trouble by fielding underperforming squads spell doom for the entire league and the very sport itself in the US, since fans can easily put soccer aside and instead follow the next big sport in their home city. Also unlike in Europe, every top league team is in financial partnership with one another (MLs uses a single-entity league structure), therefore, the emphasis will be making every team as strong as possible in order to keep as much competitive balance as possible, rather than the rich getting richer and the poor getting poorer... If fans can already guess who will win the next MLS league title, there really is no point in tuning in... where is the drama? The main problem in perspective here is that Euro soccer fans assume all the teams of an American sports league are not only competitors on the field, but financial competitors as well... and they really aren't, they are all partners in that regard. A better way to look at American sports leagues is that the entire league and all its teams are a *single* business entity... The *real* cut-throat competition is on the field of play: between the opposing players and coaches... they do suffer big consequences for not performing well, but to throw out the entire team from the league would be like throwing out the baby with the bathwater.

[@ACSR17]

Promotion/Relegation system is obviously better (yes, I am european), but it is impossible to introduce it in the US.

[@adamamroun]

"It always seems impossible until it is done" -Nelson Mandela

[@davepazz580]

The US already has a more suitable version of pro/rel... it's called the playoff system. Teams either play well and get enough points to get "promoted" to post league play and a chance for the league title, or they fail to get enough points and get "relegated" to not joining the rest and the season is considered a failure.

[@adamamroun]

@@davepazz580 Qualifying for a tournament (like the MLS Cup Playoffs) is NOT a version of pro/rel. Qualifying for a competition (like the UEFA Champions League) is NOT a version of pro/rel. Qualification is necessary for both pro/rel and the MLS Cup Playoffs. "Qualification" for something doesn't mean it's a version of pro/rel. No way you actually believe the NFL uses a "version of pro/rel".

[@davepazz580]

*Qualifying for a tournament (like the MLS Cup Playoffs) is NOT a version of pro/rel.* Yes it is... given that MLS can't be kicked out of the league for finishing last, it's a version of it that makes more sense for a single-entity league. *Qualifying for a competition (like the UEFA Champions League) is NOT a version of pro/rel.* I didn't say it was... *Qualification is necessary for both pro/rel and the MLS Cup Playoffs.* Since MLS doesn't have pro/rel, it's really the next best thing... *"Qualification" for something doesn't mean it's a version of pro/rel.* It is when you don't have actual pro/rel... *No way you actually believe the NFL uses a "version of pro/rel".* Yes I do... The entire NFL season is geared with making the playoffs... the top teams are expected to compete for the title, the not-so-great teams know if they don't reach the playoff rounds they are going to be losing players and firing coaches over that. Teams that come close to clinching a playoff berth but fail in the last game is similar enough to teams getting relegated... you consider your teams year to have been a failure.

[@isaacgogna9856]

Mls: expansion??? 👁👄👁

[@ryanbaldrick4311]

Not because USA is ever close league

[@Lonestarr022]

People forget that back in the 1800's they would elect clubs in the first division in England. They only stopped doing thtis because the level between first and second divisions were essentially even. That is not the case here. As comparing MLS to USL is like comparing The Premier League to The Isthmian League. The only way I could even remotely see it working is if MLS took control of the second and lower tiers of US Soccer, (MLS.2 ML2.3 etc...)and I'm not sure the league and clubs feel like that works for all involved.

[@GrayHairGaming]

It's chicken and the egg. MLS' stranglehold on the top division has limited the ability of lower division teams to develop. If you remove that barrier, investment comes in to the 2nd/3rd/8th tier of US Soccer and allows it to compete. Perhaps not immediately, but that's the point. MLS teams wouldn't need to worry too much about getting relegated because they would bounce right back up... for now. You also forget that former USL teams are being put into MLS -- FC Cincinnati being the latest. Yes, they get to draft off some of the other team's players and have to invest a ton of money, but it isn't like a USL team can't be adjusted to compete in MLS.

[@davepazz580]

Exactly... Second division teams are second division for a reason... they lack the resources to keep a roster full of top league players. There really is no competitive justification for kicking out an MLS team from the league simply for finishing last, only to be replaced by a team from an inferior league... makes absolutely no sense. MLS is developing a "second" division of it's own, but the purpose isn't to shuffle teams from there to MLS, but will be used strictly to develop players for the top league (which should be the purpose of a second division).

[@adamamroun]

@@davepazz580 "Second division teams are second division for a reason" Level of competition isn't necessarily the reason for those teams being in second division. For example, those teams most likely can't afford the estimated $325M MLS expansion fee. If the difference in level of competition is truly that great, then MLS shouldn't be afraid to have a pro/rel playoff each season.

[@davepazz580]

@@adamamroun It's not a question of being "afraid" to have pro/rel, just that it makes absolutely no sense whatsoever to implement in a single-entity league... Besides, no matter much greater the level of play in MLS is compared to the lower league, *someone* still has to finish last in MLS... and to be replaced by what? If the caliber of second division teams was that of a Real Madrid, Bayern Munich or Chelsea, then I'd be all for pro/rel... but let's be serious, they are not. Hence, there is absolutely nothing to gain from such a revolving-door system... it would be one bad team for a worse team every year. btw it's not just the expansion fees stopping second division teams from joining MLS, it's the lack of acceptable top-league fan base necessary to justify a top league roster that does... lower-league teams have to present a lot more than just cash to join MLS.

[@adamamroun]

@@davepazz580 "someone still has to finish last in MLS... and to be replaced by what?" It seems like you don't understand what "pro/rel playoff" means. With pro/rel playoff, it's possible that no promotion/relegation happens. (Have the worst 1st-division team play against the best 2nd-division team to determine who gets to be in the 1st division). "It's not a question of being "afraid" to have pro/rel" With this system of pro/rel playoffs, yes, it would be a question of MLS teams being afraid. MLS teams might be afraid to lose the pro/rel playoff and be relegated as a result. If the difference in league level is so significant, then MLS teams shouldn't be afraid of a pro/rel playoff format. If MLS teams would always win the pro/rel playoffs, then no relegations would occur. "Hence, there is absolutely nothing to gain from such a revolving-door system... it would be one bad team for a worse team every year." Again, it seems here like you don't understand what a "pro/rel playoff" is.... Having a pro/rel playoff every year would not cause a "revolving-door system". "just that it makes absolutely no sense whatsoever to implement (pro/rel) in a single-entity league" That's like saying it makes no sense to implement suffrage in a dictatorship. Of course it wouldn't make sense to have suffrage implemented in a dictatorship ("suffrage" and "dictatorship" contradict each other). The same as it wouldn't make sense to implement pro/rel in a single-entity league structure. You're stating the obvious. Nobody is saying that the single-entity league structure will be kept with the implementation of pro/rel. If promotion and relegation was implemented, the top league would obviously no longer use the single-entity league structure that's currently used by MLS. "lower-league teams have to present a lot more than just cash to join MLS." Money is still the primary thing needed to join the top league (MLS) in USA. Compare that to all other countries (with a few exceptions) where winning the 2nd-tier league is what's needed to join the top league.... FIFA Statutes, Article 9: "A club’s entitlement to take part in a domestic league championship shall depend principally on sporting *merit*" Summary of "MERIT" in the United States league system: WEALTH. Summary of "MERIT" in virtually all other countries' league systems: WINNING. Wealth vs. Winning, big difference.

[@carljacobs1260]

It's always the same. People say "The MLS should do this. The MLS should do that". The one unifying factor in all this proffered advice is that those giving it have no skin in the game. The MLS does not exist to establish some utopian vision of soccer perfection and it certainly does not exist to make the US competitive in international soccer. It exists to make money. It's part of the entertaining industry. Pro/Rel is certainly possible in the US. Just start a new league. Quit speculating with other people's money.

[@GrayHairGaming]

Interesting to see such a passionate defense of "the MLS" and not knowing it's never referred to as "The" MLS but just "MLS" 😂 Saying start a league on a whim when US Soccer and MLS are in bed together via SUM and actively work to shut competing leagues down is a hilarious notion as well. It's odd that for almost every other country in the world, pro/rel works and not only produces massive profits (media rights) but produces the best product on the field. MLS' standard of play is vastly inferior. Not to mention enabling the growth of the game throughout those countries because there is incentive to have local clubs who can then sell players on, get paid for training/solidarity payments, etc. But yea, just go ahead and start a league, and while you're at it a new federation with FIFA backing 😂

[@davepazz580]

And in almost every other country in the world, soccer is either the top king sport or doesn't have much competition form other sports in popularity... That's hardly the case in the US... sports-going fans here have to be won over very well if you want them to keep paying for tickets, otherwise they move over to the next big sports team in town without a second thought. That's much of the reason why fans of second or third division teams remain supporting their clubs no matter what... it's not like they have several other big-time sports to choose from if they decide their home club is going through a rough patch. MLS's standard of play may be "inferior" compared to top international leagues, however, it's still far better than the US's second division... which is yet another reason pro/rel makes absolutely no sense here. The top poster here misspoke... instead of "start a new league", he should have said "start your own club" because ultimately, pro/rel *only* makes sense when applied to fully-independent clubs... *not* franchises.

[@GrayHairGaming]

Your last point is exactly it. There is no point in investing in the sport in the US. None. It's a plaything for billionaires to reap money from. That's it. Like all of the other sports. Soccer/football in the world is a community-based thing. You don't have that with American sports. If you approached it with community, then over time you'd have more buy-in, more teams started, etc. If you look at a map of the US and plot out where the major sport teams are located, there is a TON of opportunity. So I'm mostly upset that USSF refuses to play that game. I can see in the beginning, when soccer was a relatively unknown sport in the US, why you'd want a one-league, franchise model. Your revenues in New York keep my club in Miami alive, etc. But it's grown beyond that. You can watch any major footy league in the world on ESPN+ or other streaming platforms. There is a base here now. Open up the pyramid -- provide some protections for X years to the current MLS teams -- and things would get real interesting.

[@davepazz580]

@@GrayHairGaming No point in investing in the sport in the US? Yet many continue doing so... yes, those billionaires are needed unless you want to settle for second or third division semi-pro quality for the next several decades (and I promise you, this will *not* help the game grow in the US at all). Sports grow in the US thanks to big names, big flashy media images and pizzazz... the second-division simply can't deliver that on any large scale. Soccer was not a "relatively unknown sport" when MLS came about... the US previously had a very good top league called the North American Soccer League (NASL) which was hugely successful in the 70's but died in the 80's. The NASL going bankrupt gave the sport a black eye in the US... because it was exciting and fun to watch in the 70's when all the teams could afford top-quality talent (and some very big international names) on a regular basis, but in later years became quite boring and tedious once many teams could no longer deliver the quality teams it had accustomed it's fans to. US sports fans now associated "soccer" with "failure" and unsustainability... little wonder the very *first* priority of the new league was to prevent going bankrupt while assuring all teams could financially keep a competitive roster! I would be the first the tell you that *none* of this would even be necessary if soccer was the top sport in the US and the other por sports either did not exist at all or were *far* beneath soccer in popularity. But that's not the world we live in...

[@davidlemmon4603]

I respect your passion for pro/rel but there are great arguments for and against. Ultimately, the Franchise model works which is evident by NFL, NBA, Etc... The current model has stability and investors are interested in pouring in the cash... ON A SIDE NOTE, I would be interested in some kind of pro/rel compromise where the current teams are protected but maybe 10 additional spots are made into a pro/rel league slots... Then these little teams could battle into Division 1 and become a Cinderella story... BUT it is only fair that investors that sunk $150 million into Division 1 do not have the rug ripped out from underneath them. You interested in using your creative abilities to advocate for this compromise?

[@GrayHairGaming]

I don't see how guaranteeing spots is a compromise. It is a step in the right direction, but then you run into problems with the league being massive. Can't have 34 teams (24+10 pro/rel). I can see making it a long time frame before full pro-rel goes in -- give owners 5-10 years of leeway so they can have their squads set up to be successful in that environment (rather than flipping the switch today, RIP DC United). I've put a longer pro/rel video to the side for now to walk through how I would set it up, based on incentives for both current and future investors. Just haven't had time. (Also - franchise works for incredibly slow, oligopoly growth. But the rest of the world almost exclusively has the other model in this sport. So I’m not buying franchising as the only/best option.)

[@davidlemmon4603]

I respect your position! (very strange in the modern political era to respect a differing position).. If it is demonstrated that the majority of fans want to implement this model then maybe a plan can be drawn up and presented to MLS (Do you have a link to a video demonstrating a real plan?)... BUT this is America and you can NOT FORCE a private entity to become something it does not want to be. Please don't go down the road of BUT FIFA... or whatever the rest of the world does.

[@JD-hx7yd]

@@davidlemmon4603 The Franchise model works in other sports because they are already established at the pinnacle their respective games. There is no higher level to basketball than the NBA. It doesn't work for the MLS because it isn't a top league. The players don't have the drive to win anything.

[@davepazz580]

@@JD-hx7yd It *is* the top league... domestically. Not sure how MLS's structure means that somehow the players "don't have the drive to win anything"... they signed a contract, they have to perform, period.

[@JD-hx7yd]

@@davepazz580 Every league would benefit from this. The competition would be stronger because teams don't want to be relegated. This is the reason why some employees are bad at jobs, because they know they'll get paid even if they don't work well. If you put teams under pressure, threatening them with losing money in the second division, they will have to put effort in.

[@ZebuNation]

I'm not real interested in a pro/rel system for MLS. It might be fun for the lower leagues, but I like the stability of the current system. Also, I disagree that it has less intrigue than a pro/rel system. I find pro/rel systems to be boring for teams in the middle of the table because there's nothing to play for if you aren't top 4 or bottom 4. I'd rather have teams 18-20 with nothing to play for rather than teams 7-17 with nothing to play for.

[@GrayHairGaming]

There's something to be said for stability, absolutely. But the league is pretty stable now. Seems to have "made it". I mean people are paying up $150 million to start the next franchise. I think you could do a combination of both. I know some leagues let the top team qualify for the big continental competition (say Champions League) and then let 2-5 or 2-6 go to a playoff for the remaining spots. That would bring some intrigue further down the top of the table. Likewise you could do a playoff for a larger chunk of the bottom of the table for relegation/not relegation. So yea, still middle middle of the table don't have much to go for/worry about once that is their "locked in" position... but then again, some teams offer prize money base on ending position. So throw that in there. Plus there is a $400 million offer on the table for media rights for pro/rel implementation. You could provide parachute payments to the relegated teams like the Premier League does to make sure those teams don't fold. And I think you set all this into motion several years from now so teams have time to prepare, save their dollars, etc. Also, in the current playoff system, the bottom ten teams are essentially the middle of a pro/rel system - nothing to play for, nothing to worry about once the playoff positions are settled.

[@GrayHairGaming]

I guess overall my thought is there are a limited number of "MLS Cities"... and they can't go to 40 teams. Even then, there would be HUGE chunks of America without soccer. With the current closed system there is zero/very limited incentive to start a USL/NASL team. To truly get the sport throughout the country there have to be teams within an hour or so. To get that, we need a loooooot more teams. To get a lot more teams, we need a reason to invest.

[@tchujdenetza]

Hello, Gray Hair Gaming! A fan from Europe. I have a much different concept for US Leagues that will make soccer covered all over USA including promotion/relegation. That will end MLS, but will make USA First Division far more interesting. In essence it is driving US Football/Soccer just like football is Europe. As you know almost all European countries have their own leagues. Exceptions are super minnows like country of Monaco (where the Team plays in French league) and Lichtenstein (where teams play in Swiss lower divisions). Imagine if Soccer in USA is run like Europe. USA is bigger than Europe in size and comparable as population (320:500 million is not a huge of a difference). The only bigger countries are Canada (which will soon have their own league) and Russia which has one league with teams located in continental Europe, which makes their teams relatively close to each other. Now, imagine this! Each US State has it's own football/soccer league. Every State Soccer Federation will decide how many teams will participate in League 1. It is logical that superstates in terms of population and financial strength like Texas and California should have far more teams than smaller states like New Hampshire or Rhode Island. Therefore it would make sense if Texas and California have more divisions and more teams in first division than New Hampshire or Rhode Island. Of course every State Soccer Federation will decide how many teams will be promoted and relegated between D1 & D2, between D2 & D3 and so on and so forth. Let us as well remove Hawaii and the great state of Alaska for that matter. Why? Because Alaska is quite away and quite cold. If they want they can have their own soccer league and have winners be crowned Champion of Alaska. Hawaii is insanely away so there is no way they participate in US Championship, but they can have their soccer league too and have Champions of Hawaii. So we are left with 48 States which is a perfect number. On top of that they are relatively close to each other compared to Alaska or Hawaii. Now imagine this. Every year all teams in all Divisions 1 in all 48 States play each other 2 times - one home and one away. At the end of the season whomever needs to get relegated gets relegated, whomever needs to get promoted gets promoted. But most importantly the best teams of D1 that finished first, second, third will have the opportunity to become the Champions of the USA! In this case you would have inclusion and opportunity for all to develop talent and improve throughout the years! How can that work? There are couple of options: 1. We select the top 16 States in terms of size and population (like Texas and California) and they are awarded with 2 teams. So these states will bring 32 teams. And we take the rest States that are smaller in size and population (like Iowa, New Hampshire or Rhode Island) and they get awarded 1 team. That makes US D1 of 64 Teams. Then it will be play-offs with elimination after 2-games series (home and away) that will end with a final that will determine US Champion. The final four will qualify for Concacaf Champions League. So, in this scenario we will have 11 games that will determine US Champion after the State D1 is over. 2. We select relatively few superstates (like 3-4) to have 4 teams in the US competition and vast amount of medium/sized big states with 3 or 2 teams respectively and give only 1 team to super minnows like New Hampshire or Rhode Island. At the end of the day when D1 Leagues finish in all 48 States within the same weekend we will have US D1 of 128 Teams which will compete with exactly the same way as option 1, but we will have twice more teams having the chance of being Champion of USA with only 2 games more, which basically mean 13 games after your State Championship is over. This will make US D1 like the Champions League where every game is a FINAL! That means that even in huge States like California and Texas L1 should have relatively few teams. For instance if they have 20 teams each that means that they have to play 38 games just in their state + 11 games to become Champions of USA + all Open Cup Games + Concacaf Champions League Games. It will be impossible to handle such schedule. So they have personal interest to have optimum amount of teams that are as many as possible to compete in D1, but as less as possible so that players can handle the schedule. Now, let's imagine that the Top Teams of each league plays a bunch of amateurs in US Open Cup and they have to play average of 5-7 games in this competition, before being eliminated and winning it all. Let's imagine as well that the 4 Teams that qualify for Concacaf Champions League have to play 4-8 games in this tournament. This adds 9 to 15 games more disregarding the State league and the US D1 League. Now, imagine we go with scenario 2 which means 13 games if you are good enough to win the whole thing or go to the final. In both cases you will play in Concacaf Champions League. That alone guarantees at least 22 games without the State League. So, in this case it wouldn't make any sense even for super states like California and Texas to have more than 12 teams in their L1 as 12 teams will mean 22 games throughout regular season. This system would make US Championship practically US Champions League! It will create insentive for every investor to start a team in any state, knowing that he can climb to D1 of the State and that this team can eventually become Champion of USA or finish within the last 4 and go to Concacaf Champions League, eventually win it and go to Club World Cup playing against Real Madrid, Barcelona or Manchester United. And eventually becoming Champion of the World. Tell me what you think.

[@danielbrouder8487]

But that's the thing mid teams never stay mid for years they either go up and cement there new position or go down and we won't see them for a few years or we never see em again

[@klaze9318]

MLS would be more competitive and more talents would occur, and the season would be more interesting, and it would go viral, and talents would occur especially for USMNT, and MLS teams can win the CONCACAF CHAMPIONS LEAGUE.

[@davepazz580]

All that just from kicking one bad team out and replacing it with another bad team every year?

[@davepazz580]

Update: an MLS team won the CONCACAF Champions League and they did it *without* having pro/rel... Proving how unnecessary it is...

[@athosgomesfonseca]

🗺️🥳⚽️🇧🇷🫡🇺🇸⚽️🥳🗺️

[@robertevbayekha6639]

Yeah mls do need pro and rel but nba,nfl,nhl,mlb,nll,usarl are doing fine

[@GrayHairGaming]

Pre-pandemic MLB stadiums were mostly empty. NBA ratings are down something like 30% compared to last year. In most cities they are irrelevant. But yea they’re doing great 👍

[@davepazz580]

@@GrayHairGaming Fan support for all US sports have historically fluctuated, but the fact remains these sports have remained in business for many decades with no pro/rel and overall, are still more popular.

[@GrayHairGaming]

"...are still more popular" -- in the US! And sure they've stayed in business. Some of them on the backs of taxpayer subsidies for new stadiums and such, and when that runs out the teams up and run to another city and milk them for it. MLB is a dying business held up by TV revenue because there is no sense of community with teams that move. The population is aging. The games take too long and for the lonest time baseball refused to do things like tactical graphics for showing the shift, etc. NBA rating are abysmal. Absolutely abysmal. The move of one player to LA has killed that league. I'm not saying pro/rel fixes those leagues necessarily. But applying that model to soccer/football, where another model is clearly superior in that sport, is silly. New clubs pop up all over America, and then die off relatively quickly. Why be part of a "supporters group" of a lower league team? They can't go anywhere and do anything. And if you do the same for MLS, they can up and move on you. It's crazy.

[@davepazz580]

@@GrayHairGaming And there would be no top-league soccer at all in the US right now if not for MLS's business structure... The US previously had a top league (the old NASL) which thrived in the 70's but died by the mid 80's... it went bankrupt because some teams were able to spend while others weren't. The drop in quality meant fans turned elsewhere in those cities and the entire league had to fold (despite the fact that a small amount of teams remained doing very well business-wise). When the old NASL died out, the second-division remained... did that league blow up in popularity because the NASL was no longer around? No... Why? Because second-division teams aren't meant to be anything other than second-division... no way are they going to match the spending needed to bring in top-league quality rosters. That can *only* happen when a rich group of people decide to pool thier money together and start a league to immediately attract better quality players... no other way around that (unless you want to wait 100 years for organic "clubs" to develop... I'll be too old by then!) To avoid the same fate of the NASL, MLS decided to become single-entity where all the teams are owned by the league and therefore, financially controlled. Compared to the early years of the league, no question the league has grown in popularity and is now in more markets than ever before (and will continue expanding over time)...

[@davidday2373]

MLS needs Pro-Rel like the EPL needs Playoffs.

[@stevenygabbyperez695]

I like our league. I don't want a league with only a handful of teams with no chance to ever win a championship. If you want to see how a pure pro/rel system works in the U.S. look at college football. Any team can win the championship every year yet it's only 10 or 20 of the top teams that ever win.

[@GrayHairGaming]

I believe in incentives. The Cleveland Browns have been a horrifically run organization for decades. Yet they have no consequences for being so bad. And they get a shot at the best draft prospects every year. They have zero incentive to get better - fans keep showing up, they keep getting TV revenue.

[@stevenygabbyperez695]

@@GrayHairGaming Do you think the Browns are trying to lose? Its not lack of incentive. I'm a dolphins fan and they too have been very bad for most of the last 20 years but they are one of the biggest spending teams. Do you really think if some semi pro team was given their spot or Cleveland's they will somehow be able to win more with far less resources? Look at European football at the top. They only have a handful of teams that have a realistic chance to win ever. EPL has had only 4 different champions since the MLS started in 1996. MLS has had 12 winners plus a number of different supporter shield winners. So have all other American league's expect the NBA which had 9. Our league just needs time to grow. With new franchises thriving like Atlanta and LAFC and rapid growth in almost every market this league is well on its way to surpassing Liga MX in the next 5 years and competing with top European leagues in the next 20. I think pro/rel could work in the lower divisions. Let them do it and fight to get to the 2nd division then from there those players can be sold to MLS or Europe depending on their talent. If pro-rel is really so great the the lower division will have massive success and maybe the MLS will be forced to implement it. But I believe if pro-rel were implemented immediately including the 1st division it would destroy the MLS and set soccer back at least a decade. The system is too foreign so new fans will be harder to gain. What happens when a great franchise like Atlanta is relegated for finishing last? In this league now even good teams can end up on the bottom in a given year because there is so much parity. I believe if a team were relegated they would lose so many fans and income. For some teams that would mean they would never be able to fully recover or it could take them 20 years to get back to championship level and in fact the league would end up like the EPL or even worse in that only 5 or 6 teams ever really have a chance to win a championship. Some teams will be permanent mid level teams and the rest would be cycling in and out of the league with no hope of ever actually winning. That is not better. Pro-rel is a system that developed organically in England at a time when teams were little more than amateur and it was reasonable to think that a new local team could get to their level in a few years. But today, I don't think we will ever see a lower division team get into the EPL and compete to win the league over teams like Liverpool and Man City that are spending hundreds of millions on players from every corner of the globe. If a team managed to make that journey in 20 years it would be a miracle. Maybe over a 50 year period it can be done. So if I'm a fan of say the Colorado Rapids do I want a league where if my team finishes last they can rebound and be near the top again in one or two years (happens all the time) or do I want a league that if my team finishes last it could easily take 20 plus years for the club to recover? There is also the basic finances. There is no way the MLS could go pro-rel because most teams would lose so much value if their pro status is threatened. The share holder model would collapse. If you promote a team with second tier facilities and fan support and relegate a thriving franchise that could cost the league a ton of money. In short, pro-rel will never work in the MLS. If it comes to America it will have to be in a different league. But the MLS is thriving so I don't see why any change is needed. Just need more time to grow.

[@GrayHairGaming]

1. I'm not saying a team replacing Cleveland would be able to win more - but if said team existed, they deserve a *shot* at it. Cleveland literally has zero incentive to get better. What are American football fans in Cleveland going to do? Support another Cleveland team? Nope, not possible. You're stuck with the mess that the Browns are. 2. MLS has different winners because of salary cap and *forced* parity. You can't say "There is parity!" without acknowledging it is *forced* due to the salary cap. 3. You want growth for soccer in America? What grows faster: an open system where any team can begin at the bottom and work up, or where you need $150 million just to have a conversation? And what will MLS grow to? 30 teams? 32? So only major cities get local soccer. And for the remaining parts of the country... sorry? Hope you'll still enjoy the sport from afar? 4. So you're saying let teams fight and claw their way to 2nd division then allow their players to be stolen with no recourse and no chance at first division? Incentives are all out of whack there. If pro/rel was allowed by USSF it would, yes, have the potential to destroy MLS. Which is why it will never happen. Remember, USSF and MLS are in bed together. USSF has the ability to kill off other leagues like USL, NASL, etc. because they provide the sanctioning for league status. 5. Let me introduce you to AFC Wimbledon: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AFC_Wimbledon. Owners move the original club to Milton Keynes down the road. A new local team rises up to replace it: AFC Wimbledon. In 9-10 years they earn 5 promotions from the very basement of English football to League One (3rd division). Can they go higher? Who knows, but they have the opportunity to go higher. 6. Michael Eisner bought Portsmouth (League One) and admitted he went that route instead of MLS because it was a significantly lower risk. I believe paid around £5.67m and promised to invest another 10 million. Compare that to $150 million, again, just to get started with MLS from a franchise fee standpoint not to mention stadium, salaries, etc. 7. Re: Colorado Rapids, I don't know, if there wasn't forced parity the Rapids wouldn't have a chance to rebound would they? That's kind of the point. The cream rises to the top - you run the club poorly, you get punished. In MLS you run the club poorly, you get draft picks and again, thanks to the salary cap, you don't really pay a price. 8. You're right that MLS won't go pro-rel because they charge an insane amount of money just to begin to be in the club. Long term MLS will prevent the United States from ever doing anything great in the footballing world. It will be just like MLB, NFL, NBA. Big cities will have teams, and that will be it. The only problem: in MLB, NFL, NBA the US is the world leader. In soccer, the US is far, far, far, far behind.

[@stevenygabbyperez695]

@@GrayHairGaming Thanks for replying. 1. To quote famous words... " YOU PLAY TO WIN THE GAME!" Lol. Of course the browns have inset I've to win. You make a lot more money on tickets, local tv, merchandise, ect. MLB has a flaw that allows one team, the Marlins, to profit from losing but in most cases especially in the NFL teams make more money the more they win. Ok, they don't face total annihilation if they lose but it's still not good. I believe in any system in which losers fall out of the league will eventually become a top heavy league. 2. Of course it's enforced. There is no natural parity of talent or resources. That's why American leagues have implemented salary Caps and spending minimums and all sorts of tools to enforce parity. If not only the big markets would ever win because they will always have the most resource. Baseball is the only exception where low payroll teams can win against high payroll teams. But soccer, like basketball and football are simple. If you spend more you win more with very few exeptions. But yes it's enforced parity because it must be. But European system discourages parity it's not just coincidence. The rich get richer. 3. An open system has to grow organically. I don't think that will happen in a country where soccer isn't number one an there are 3 of the biggest leagues in the world for other sports. MLS approach is the fastest way to catch up with those leagues. 4. I agree that MLS has a stranglehold on soccer in America and they are not likely to allow pre-release at any level. That said I still think pro-rel in the lower divisions would be the best and only possibility for it to happen in America. 5. Wembly F.C. is a great story. But wouldn't want to trade the MLS for the chance that some small town team can have a Cinderella experience. 6. There is a huge difference between 6 million and 150 million. So much so that you're not really comparing apples to apples. I don't enough about that particular situation to comment further but it sounds like he just didn't want to make a large commitment to soccer just get a taste. MLS teams aren't the same as owning a small team in Europe anyway. You would have to compare it to a club with similar value. I wonder if you asked him if he were choosing between a European club of the same value as an MLS team if he would prefer the security of buy a club that can't be relegated the next year. 7. Not on Colorado. Most teams would have trouble finding a championship caliber team without forced parity. This ties into an were #2 8. Pro-rel has to grow organically. In the American sports culture that will never happen. Too much competition and too few soccer heads. Most people would just get confused and focus on the sports they already know and love. MLS approach has given us exciting teams and some international names that are drawing more and more people. Do you have any ideas of how a pro-rel system could be put in place in America?

[@GrayHairGaming]

Yes I have an idea on pro/rel. Probably too long for comment, but the gist: it starts with lower leagues with a set in stone date where they can earn promotion to MLS (and begin relegating from MLS). Buys current owners enough time to get a return on their investment or divest themselves of their investment (MLS' value, in my opinion, goes up with pro/rel, better TV, more excitement as the set in stone date gets closer, so MLS could buy the club back at a set % over current value like a merger/acquisition). So you tell owners and media, you have until 2030. New clubs are formed, USL/NASL/NPSL/the whole mess are aligned in some configuration of pro/rel, there is now incentive to have clubs at the lower level (lower price point buy-in, potential to earn your way to MLS), maybe you even allow current MLS owners a chance to own another club elsewhere. Every year as 2030 gets closer the excitement builds = new TV contract = enriches MLS/current owners. I don't think going in and putting it into place with MLS right now works. I'm certain it won't work; so you definitely start from the bottom. But if it never connects to MLS, it never works. It has to be connected/have a firm date to be connected for incentive purposes. Re: Portsmouth. I dunno, would you pay $6.5 million (converting from Euros) for a club with 100+ year history and an average attendance of 17,917 average attendance (last year) or $150 million franchise fee + stadium + everything else for a team in a league with an average attendance of 22k? (Yes the newer clubs have more like Atlanta but very small sample size in terms of number of seasons - will those fans stick?) You could buy 23 Portsmouths for 1 MLS club. That's insane. I don't have time now to go back through the rest of the points, but I do appreciate a polite YT comment discussion :)

[@boqoryare1984]

The MLS needs to eliminate Eastern conference and Western conference and let the table ran throughout the entirety of season like the the way the premier league does. There are no Eastern conference and Western conference in the premier league system. There are no playoffs in the premier league and that should be implemented in the the MLS. There should be home/away games and the winner club should receive three points and the looser club should get a deducted points as well. The MLS should eliminate the Draft team and replace it with an academy clubs the way Barclay does/entire Europe. The top four teams in the league table should be qualify for the Champions league match and 5th and 6th in the table should be headed the North American style of Europa league matches. The bottom teams in the league should be automatically eliminated or relegated and join the next lower league. In other to give the promotion of the top four or five teams in lower league to joined the MLS teams. This will create a such an excitement of lower league to maybe playing against the Big boys in the league. The North American should get rid off the name of CONACAF in the champions league and adopt four letter words that summarizes the entire hemisphere of North America. Like Europe does in their champions league which is U.E.F.A meaning United Europe Football Association. For example I have one how about the U.N.S.A Champions league. U is for United N is for North S is for Soccer A is for Association. The U.N.S.A of Champions league should be played on club verse another club like LA Galaxy verses a club from Mexico or Uruguay. The CONACAF champions league is build on system of country vs another country and that is wrong. The champions league of Europe consisted of let say Chelsea of England taking on Losco Lily in France and not the other way around. And Canada should have their own league and get out of the MLS.

[@cdious6]

You have to take into account that the MLS is made up of two countries. What if all three Canadian teams are facing relegation? The MLS should kick Canada out? As for America how is it good for MLS if it just kick entire states out? You just gloss over how teams lose money and sponsorship once relegated as if it’s easy for them to bounce back. Pro/rel won’t make the league better MONEY will. So stop this myth about pro/rel because that system truly breeds mediocrity with teams who season goal isn’t even to win the league, just to stay in it. Talk about nothing to play for what happens when a premier league team gains enough points that mathematically no one can catch them? What is the rest of the league playing for? That’s when you bring up the playoffs of the losers, and that special feeling that you get from it is not from the product on the field but the fans. It’s the fans that make those relegation games worth while but it doesn’t make the players on the field better. If your team suck your team sucks. At least our system helps you get better for next year while pro/rel takes your wallet while they kick you out the door.

[@GrayHairGaming]

Thanks for joining the discussion. I disagree, but appreciate your commenting. 1. MLS is in two countries. Okay? So was NASL. USL has Ottawa Fury and Toronto FC II. The two countries thing is weird, but it isn't kicking anyone out. In fact, opening up the pyramid would allow more teams to be created throughout the United States and Canada. How? Because they would have the opportunity to get promoted. There were a multitude of factors why Edmonton FC (NASL) failed, but one of them is they have no where to go besides staying in NASL. No promotion = slow death. 2. Kicking entire states out... not sure what you mean. The club would still exist. Just in the league below. Instead of kicking entire states out, let's talk about which states don't have an MLS club. Which list is longer? There are 16 states with at least 1 MLS franchise. That's 34 without. (Not to mention that even in the states that have an MLS team, for many people it is several hours drive to even get to a game.) 3. Yes, you lose money and sponsorship. Sometimes you have to sell players because they want to play at the highest level or you can't afford them. That's the point. There are consequences to running your franchise poorly. Currently there are no consequences. 4. I actually agree money will make the league better. More teams = more fans = more eyeballs = more advertisers = more TV deals = more money. Did you know MLS turned down a $4 billion offer for ten years of media rights for going to pro/rel? (www.espn.com/soccer/major-league-soccer/story/3164144/mls-rejected-$4-billion-media-rights-deal-that-hinged-on-promotion-and-relegation). There's your more money. That's a ridiculous amount of money. $400 million per year is almost as much as adding 3 new franchises at the ridiculous $150 million per franchise fee... every year... for 10 yeas. 5. Let's look at the EPL. Times the title has been won on the final day or close to it: 2007/2008 - final day - Man U, 2008/2009 - next to last game - Man U, 2009/2010 - final day - Chelsea, 2010/2011 - next to last game - Man U, 2011/2012 - final day - Man City, 2012/2013 - secured with 4 games left - Man U, 2013/2014 - final day - Man City, 2014/2015 - secured with 3 matches left - Chelsea, 2015/2016 - secured with 2 more games to play - Leicester City, 2016/2017 - secured with 2 more games to play - Chelsea. So in the last 10 seasons the title has been won 4 times on the final day, 2 times on the next to last game, 2 times with 2 games left, 1 time w/3 games left, and 1 time w/4 games left. Considering there are 38 games, that's incredible. And you could make the argument those last 1-4 games are then pointless... well... it's like securing home field advantage or a bye in the NFL. That can be done earlier in the season and you're left with "will they play any of the starters?" questions. Pretty similar. On top of that the rest of the league is playing for final position on the table... who cares right? Except that money thing you mentioned. The higher in the standings you are at the end of the season, the more money the team gets in prize money. 6. So you're arguing the relegation playoff is a poor product on the field but the fans make the game. Okay, so let's flip around to MLS. Once the teams have been eliminated from the playoffs... what are they playing for? If you are that far down the standings, you don't have a good product on the field either. The only difference is there is no consequence (relegation) for being a bad team. 7. Our system helps teams get better the next season... meaning reward for being terrible. The Cleveland Browns have killed off many a first round draft pick's career. Again, no consequences. It's odd to me in a capitalistic society like the US that we are okay with handouts to poor teams rather than forcing them to get better of their own accord.

[@cdious6]

Where are the teams that go from worst to first? I understand pro/rel has consequences for the bottom teams but it doesn’t make them better. A team that gets relegated one year and then promoted later didn’t get better they just returned to the same spot as before, still fighting not to get relegated. Pro/rel leagues create a top heavy society within them. Look at the Prem, only 6-8 teams really compete for winning it out of 20. You really think that makes a league competitive? Where is the equality? It’s not in the money, the tv deals, or the athletes on the field. If the Cleveland browns ever got there stuff together they still would have a better shot at winning the Super Bowl than the bottoms team of the Prem winning it. Teams in closed systems have the opportunity to play younger players as they look ahead to next year. Your teams fighting relegation don’t have that option, they play who will win for them now. What pro/rel creates is a bunch of teams in the middle, forever caught in that fantasized revolving door endlessly going from one league to another. That is mediocrity.

[@GrayHairGaming]

Pick an argument. You are all over the place. Pro/rel rewards clubs that are run well. It punishes clubs that aren't. It's the ultimate meritocracy. Yes, there are 6-8 teams competing for the top of the league... usually. They're also the biggest, best run, and most invested in clubs as well. Why is that a problem? Equality? What do you want, sport socialism? The Patriots have been top of the NFL for 15 years. Where's the equality there? Re: the Browns - I highly disagree. Because the Browns have fed off of first round draft picks. They've had decades to "get it together". You ask for equality, I ask, why are they allowed to hang around for decades being an incredibly poorly run team? Okay, so teams can play their younger players if they aren't in the playoffs. You could make the same argument for the non-relegated but also non-top 5 teams in the Premier league, no? Sure the bottom 3-5 don't have that option -- that's called consequences. You've argued it's not fair to the middle teams (but hey they can play their youth), it's not fair to the bottom (because we should reward mediocrity). Ever heard of a team called Leicester City? They were in League One in 2008-2009 (relegated from the Championship the year before). None of your response talks about how with pro/rel and the simple opportunity -- you know the thing the US is built on -- to get promoted leads to tons of teams. Michael Eisner bought Portsmouth (League One) team because the risk/reward was so much better than in MLS. The sale was about $7-8 million if I remember correctly... compared to $150 million buy-in fee for MLS. So one of our billionaires decides England's 3rd tier is a better option for investment than in the US. That's telling.

[@cdious6]

So is every team supposed to get it right every year? That’s impossible but pro/rel rewards those that don’t need help and punish those that do. I’ve seen what happens when the top teams in those leagues aren’t playing up to expectation. Suddenly you have people claiming that those leagues aren’t that good because it’s too open. I guess you see a league where everyone has a shot as a step back. You have an elitist attitude on this subject. Let the rich get richer and have poor fight amongst themselves for a spot at the table. Unchecked money is destroying the integrity of those leagues. Soon the top teams will be “too big to fail.” As far as the Patriots they have the best QB and HC in the league for the past 15 years so I’m not sure about what point you’re trying to make. It’s not like someone paid for that to happen. When Brady came out of college no one knew he would be that good. Let’s be honest about the Cleveland Browns, no one knows why they are consistently bad, it goes against science. Still they are one team out of 32 and I was told they won in the past but that was before my time. I keep asking people what makes pro/rel better than our system and most of the time I just get the answers, it’s been around for hundreds of years or that’s how they do it in Europe and their leagues are better. The worst one I have heard is that it develops talent, no good coaches develop talent. There are a lot of pro/rel leagues around the world but they all don’t develop the same number of talented players. Last I’m not going to base the health of The MLS off of one investor. It’s not telling for a billionaire to go with the cheaper option, you don’t know all the factors that went in for him to make his decision so don’t act like you’ve found a smoking gun. So why is pro/rel better than the American way?

[@ozzyphil74]

Hey, I'm late to this party but I'll take a shot at your final question. I don't know whether Pro/Rel would work in the USA given the size of the country and the financial position is dicey but I will say that it certainly makes players better in one way... It puts them in high pressure situations more often. With Pro/Rel, apart from fighting for the championship (the pastime of the really elite teams and players), the lower sides also have to show bottle to fight for their place at the table (or to go up for those in the lower leagues). This pretty soon leads to seeing which players perform under this severe load and even if the teams don't always get rewarded for this scrappy existence, the players often do. Find yourself in a lower tier side or an unfancied top league side and do well in a Pro/Rel battle often earns you a transfer to a side fighting for higher honours. One issue I see with the way the US sports teams are run is that this pressure is missing. Sure you're still fighting for your spot on the team but say you have it... say you're the best player on the Browns for example. You really don't have to over exert yourself unless you personally want to win badly and you can get someone to come and trade for you.... So I suppose, there is nothing stopping you from playing just well enough to earn your keep but with no other motivation.