Comments on: Vancouver Whitecaps NASL Team goes to Edmonton Drillers After Caps Go to MLS

By: Ken Jamieson

Ken Jamieson — Wed, 09 Dec 2009 03:15:08 +0000

When this story broke here in Edmonton, there was a lot of concern that the Drillers in 2011 would be a U-23 team for the Whitecaps. A simple review of the Seattle Sounders move from USL-1 to MLS indicates that the potential for Edmonton to get a quality team in 2011 is quite strong.
In the four years prior to leaving USL-1 Seattle won two titles; notwithstanding their superb performance in MLS in 2009, the vast majority of players with the MLS Sounders were not USL Sounders. As is the case with promoted teams in England, the Whitecaps would follow Seattle’s lead and re-tool before moving to MLS, that means many Div-2 calibre players would be moving to Edmonton from Vancouver in 2011, players with championship experience.
If the NASL comes to fruition, it could be a major boon for Canada as other cities such as Victoria, Ottawa, Hamilton and Quebec City are viable options.

By: Brian Quarstad

Brian Quarstad — Thu, 03 Dec 2009 15:40:15 +0000

Good stuff Montreal. I listened to almost all the online supporters summit and just didn’t remember Garber talking about that issue. I had looked at this previously but this had escaped me.

I’ll fix the post when I get a moment and make the correction with the quote. By the way, for those of you who don’t want to go though the live blog, here is the Q and A.

12:12
[Comment From Fairwooder]
mls has the tv contract, better owners, markets and infrastructure, so I don’t see how any u.s. based second tiered soccer league can be considered real competition, so why can’t mls teams own a team in these second level leagues especially with the elimination of the ten game reserve league. Is there any thought in the league office that greater importance of these lower tiered leagues to their fans may later turn them into potential mls viewers?

12:15
Don Garber: There’s no rule that an MLS team can’t own a second division team. Clearly, there are changes afoot in the second division that I hope get resolved soon. Ultimately, I beleive MLS clubs should have a closer relationship with second division clubs. So the continued growth and success of that division is important. However today without broad geographic distribution in the second division it’s difficult for every MLS team to have the same opportunity to connect with a lower division club.

By: Someone from Montreal

Someone from Montreal — Thu, 03 Dec 2009 15:17:40 +0000

Garber stated that there is no rule preventing an MLS team to own a second division team (USL-1/TOA) in that interview:

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/mlscup2009/2010283309_webgarberchat16.html

By: Eric (on the Westcoast)

Eric (on the Westcoast) — Wed, 02 Dec 2009 16:37:20 +0000

BQ, you are fair to say you report fairly. Many of us have opinions and assumtions which we all like to spew. But what I have read and talk to, over here in Vancouver there is excitement. What I like to share with others is that the TOA was not an association created in the last year, when NuRock bought the USL structure, this has been going on for well over 2 years, starting discussions with Nike who bought out Umbro, now they own a league. Surprise! What Vancouver’s ownership is trying to do is see soccer suceed once again in North America.

MLS has key cities, but clearly there are other large market cities wanting in, but realisticaly you can’t have a 30 team premier league in soccer (58 games). We can look at Europe as an example. Vancouver, yes is moving up to MLS, but they have always stated in ther reports of keeping their developmental program sound and safe. MLS is looking at Vancouver’s strucure to see how this system could work for other owners to ensure a quality product hits teh soccer pitch for the fans. Therefore, Vancouver is smart to bring Edmonton into NASL to back fill their spot to ensure NASL survives as well have have a location were they can find talent from. I am not for sure but I believe Vancouver is also keeping a PDL Team in USL.

By: Brian Quarstad

Brian Quarstad — Wed, 02 Dec 2009 13:54:31 +0000

Bart, come on man. I think you have to admit that I have tried to report as much as I can here and as fairly as I can and not spew a lot of misinformation or opinions. It is quite possible I got this wrong and as I posted right above your comment, I have a question out to someone who can answer this and we will get it right. OK?

By: Bart

Bart — Wed, 02 Dec 2009 13:31:51 +0000

MLS teams most certainly can own teams in Division II, be it USL or NASL. This continuing mis-information taints the quality of the post and misleads the reader, whether unintentionally or not. It certainly shows bias towards NASL, which, if that is what you want to do, is fine, just let folks know.

By: Brian Quarstad

Brian Quarstad — Wed, 02 Dec 2009 04:23:48 +0000

ERic, Sorry. It really is starting to become an informational overload. I’m pretty good at keeping track of this stuff too, but I’m afraid it’s just getting to be a bit overwhelming.

I just fired off an email to someone who could answer this question. Hopefully I’ll get an answer and let everyone know.

By: ERic

ERic — Wed, 02 Dec 2009 04:14:23 +0000

“Currently, MLS team are prohibited from having a team in the USL structure…” I’m surprised you wrote that. I’m certain that me and another person that was actually at the Supporters Summit commented in one of your other blog posts that Garber categorically denied that at the Supporters Summit. But, as you mentioned in yet another comments, it’s reaching the point where it’s hard to keep track of what each of us has said, and where;)

By: Brian Quarstad

Brian Quarstad — Wed, 02 Dec 2009 03:28:50 +0000

USSF: NASL will be division 2 just as USL-1 has been division 2. So MLS (D-1) could be associated with or own an NASL team (D-2). I am not writing about any other league that would be below the NASL.

By: Big E

Big E — Wed, 02 Dec 2009 03:21:50 +0000

Brian

When you say MLS may own NASL division 2 teams, do you mean NASL clubs (which is the USSF/CAS div 2 league) or did you imply that NASL will have a lower division?

Thanks