U.S. Soccer Board of Directors Votes Unanimously Not to Sanction USL or NASL for Division II Status in 2010
U.S. SOCCER BOARD OF DIRECTORS VOTES UNANIMOUSLY NOT TO SANCTION USL OR NASL FOR DIVISION II STATUS IN 2010
CHICAGO (Dec. 30, 2009) – The U.S. Soccer Board of Directors voted unanimously on Tuesday to not sanction either the USL or the NASL to operate a Division II professional league in 2010.
The decision was made on the recommendation of the Professional League Task Force, which determined that neither organization on its own was able to provide a viable and sustainable operation during the upcoming season. Both organizations were unable to meet U.S. Soccer’s requirement of a minimum of eight viable teams for 2010.
Despite the ruling, the U.S. Soccer Board of Directors has given both organizations seven days to try to work out an interim solution for the 2010 season.
“After carefully reviewing the findings from the Task Force it was clear there are still too many uncertainties for both organizations, which would be extremely difficult to resolve in a timely fashion that would allow them to prepare for the 2010 season,” said U.S. Soccer President Sunil Gulati. “In the best interest of soccer in the United States, we decided to not sanction either league at this point. However, we did encourage both leagues to come together in the next week and attempt to develop another plan which would allow a single league to be approved on a provisional basis. We are committed to finding ways to improve the long-term viability of all leagues and teams and continue the growth of soccer in the United States.”
Comments are closed.
Merry Christmas to you too Sunil!
WOW! That’s a surprise to me. I really didn’t expect to have this decision come down this way. What if there won’t be a D2 league in the USA next season? What will that do to the US Open Cup? From another perspective, I guess we shouldn’t be so surprised. We are all aware that the US Soccer leadership is much more interested in the MLS format than other formats. Needless to say, this decision is also like the ‘father’ telling the ‘sons’ “Boys, you are brothers, so whatever arguments you have now must be put aside because you’ll always be brothers! Oh, by the way ‘sons’ keep in mind that I, the ‘father’ feel strongly that both of you are at fault and both of you have potential.” If that’s the position, then I applaud US Soccer. Ultimately, we the fans, just want the soccer bureaucracy to settle their quarrels and give us good soccer to enjoy, admire, and most importantly support. I’m still quite hopeful!
Waited all this time just to hear this is disapointing.Gulati needs to make a damm decsion and live with it.If he thinks everyone is going to kiss and make up he is mistaken to many bridges have been burned.
I forgot to mention earlier. Thanks, BQ, for breaking the story before anyone else. This proves the level of your commitment. Happy New Year!
As for sal’s comment; I really am not disappointed. I can see how the US Soccer feels strongly about not allowing the dysfunction to be perpetuated. Approving both USL and NASL (without being truly viable) would’ve simply enabled their divisive attitudes. I think this was precisely the “tough decision” that Gulati’s sticking by.
What about the CSA?
If the 2 leagues get together, at least to save 2010, can the USSF sanction this temporary league so that the teams can compete in the US Open Cup and the Voyageurs Cup?
CSA has said previously they would not sanction if USSF didn’t.
Here are my two reactions to the decision:
1. Nurock wins and the franchise fee money train keeps rolling on for them.
2. MLS labor dispute is a lot worse than is being let on and there is no way MLS would want/let USSF to sanction a 2nd division and lose all the top college prospects who won’t make it overseas to land in the 2nd division.
“In the best interest of soccer in the United States…” we decided to do nothing. How is NOT having a D2 league “in the best interest of soccer in the United States”. Really? Sure, both groups had hurdles to get over before the start of the 2010 season, but neither group could have gotten over those hurdles? Or even most of them?
They’re not going to get back together. That’s a boat that’s never going to come. Time to move on and get a D2 league sanctioned, one way or the other. Yes, a lot of people will be pissed off either way, but isn’t that better than everyone being pissed off that there’s no D2 league?
“Approving both USL and NASL (without being truly viable) would’ve simply enabled their divisive attitudes. I think this was precisely the “tough decision” that Gulati’s sticking by.”
NASl is as viable an option that there has been for 2nd division soccer in U.S in along time. I think that not granting them 2nd div. status is going to hurt the game in the U.S not to mention the damage it will do to Canada. The lawsuits that USL filed is the only reason that there still in this conversation.
Wow what a cop-out!
Begun, this clone war has.
Seriously, the thing that worries me the most here is that 1) the dispute isn’t resolved in the next 7 days, 2) USL and/or NASL sues the USSF, and 3) the US stays home from the World Cup and is replaced with Ireland.
I blame this entire mess on England, who somehow foresaw the draw, and have arranged to have a guaranteed 3 points in group play.
More seriously, you have to think that in this 7 day period the USSF has told USL/NASL what they want to happen, and how it’s going to go down, and basically have given both sides a week to swallow a bitter pill that makes neither of them happy.
Well, what are reasonable options now? This is how I see them:
1. There is no compromise and NASL plays unsanctioned this year. USL1 probably folds into USL2.
2. NASL teams work out an arrangement to play in USL1 this year. There are hurdles here, things like Atlanta and St Louis not owning USL franchise rights in their areas. Would require compromises from those franchise rights owners.
3. NASL owners buy USL1 from NuRock and combine things into one NASL league and get sanctioned. Will cost them millions likely and who knows if they have it or are willing to spend it.
4. Neither USL1 nor NASL play this year, possibly forcing a number of teams to fold. The east cost USL1 teams play in USL2, the western USL1 teams take a year off before going to MLS.
5, 6, 7? Other options?
Chase said:
“More seriously, you have to think that in this 7 day period the USSF has told USL/NASL what they want to happen, and how it’s going to go down, and basically have given both sides a week to swallow a bitter pill that makes neither of them happy.”
That’s about the way I see it. The USSF is saying, we want you guys back together – you have 7 days to work out your differences. If you don’t, then we won’t sanction anyone this year.
It’s just kind of an oddly worded Press Release, because the first sentence makes it sound like this is a final decision and no one will be sanctioned as a D2 league for this year. But it then goes on to say they gave the 2 parties a week to figure out an alternative that would meet the criteria for being sanctioned.
On the plus side, I’m happy that there is at least a deadline of some sort in place. Regardless of how things are going out, if any league in any form is going to play a season, the sooner they can actually get started planning stuff, the better.
This was the only decision USSF could hand down at this point. Obviously, the structure of football in the US needs to be revised and this will not be done overnight over a Christmas break. The MLS is everyone’s choice of Div I, and now there must be a game plan to build a Div II and III before drilling down to PDL and Super Y at the development levels.
I wonder if anyone @ USSF has considered the idea of splitting each league into Eastern & Western Conferences with relegation and promotion between the same conferences at each level (ie: Bottom Western team in MLS goes down to NASL West and West NASL Champ moves up and then the same from NASL down/up to USL, and the same on the Eastern side). With expansion, each conference could build towards 6-10 teams and a viable travel option for the vast size of North America. Will it water down or develop the game is the question…no doubt both over time.
Of course, there will be lots of issues in any re-structure, especially given the difference in franchise fees ($40 Mil for MLS and $750K for USL and does the NASL have a fee?) and ownership of the players. My feeling is given this dire situation of: 3 leagues, the MLS Players CBA, Ownership differences, travel, reserve teams, development programs, transfers, and everything else that makes football; much more due dilligence by the USSF, CSA (and maybe Mexico) & FIFA must be done now while the sport is at this crossroads of popularity again in NA, especially with the spotlight of a World Cup year glowing in the background.
How this can be accomplished in time for everyone to be included in the 2010 season is for the magicians to figure out, but I hope the USSF & FIFA force the teams to stick with the USL for simplicity this year while they figure it out.
Most of the former teams already have a USL franchise and the ones who don’t can wait a year or perhaps play under a “discounted-one-year” fee and be gone. For the Minny Thunder, they are in arrears it seems and have already been replaced by one of their creditors with a USL team. This bandaid will allow the season to start and get the restructuring process under way. Then it will come down to how the federations want their game to look going forward into 2011 after the excitement of the WC is over. Good luck to all, you are going to need it!
I am sure there are 2 sides to this, but what I see is:
1) Quite a few teams and organizations not wanting to deal with USL
2) Viable plans from the NASL (and teams)
Very disappointed that USSoccer didn’t come down with a decision that is GOOD for US Soccer.
This is a very crucial time on american soccer,and I think it is a good one!
Sometimes thigs have to get uggly in order to get better. I strongly believe that the new NASL should fight this battle to the end,they have the support of the fans, and that support will only get bigger if they fight.
Our sport has being kidnapped in America by a group of narrow interests bussinessmen that have treat it like it is a Wall Street share.I knew they were not going to sancion the new NASL.No surprise,as they had follow a pattern of trying to monopolize our game.
Our problem starts with the USSF wich is in bed with them!!
Since the begining of this “Major” league with a low salary cap,everything has being made very unsoccerlike. They have show to the real soccer fans their true intentions and their lack of understanding of our game.
To capture the magic,the passion and all the subttle deep meanings of our game should have been the goal of our league. There are reasons why a River-Boca; an Inter-Milan; a Celtics -Rangers are so especial ; it is the history behind the clubs. Those rivalries are born naturally, not by marketing.
By crating a league the way they did, they showed us their lack of knowledge of our game.Instead of creating it as the platform for clubs to be created by cities and other entities and have a chance to grow and that way let the magic of our game come naturally. They created the league,the clubs ,the clubs names,logos,colors,decided the “selected markets”ans also very conveniently “designed” a system in wich they own pretty much everything.
All of this without any consideration or consultation of the fans,wich is the esential element of our game!!
By implementing things like the shoot outs,they showed us their arrogance and their “non soccer” roots.Pretending to do changes to the most popular sport on the planet!!!!
Why dont we have real soccer people on the comanding positions of the US soccer structures!?!?!? In a country that you can find so many ex stars,legends of our game.Have we thought about that?
Now that a potential more soccer like league is emerging,they feel threaten and naturally react protecting their bussiness. We should have no doubt at this point that this is all our game is for them, a bussiness.
Fans,TOA ,new NASL, I think this is the time to FIGHT for the good of our game on the US.
Go to FIFA. USSF has a dirty floor, they had allow leagues not complying with FIFA regulations to operate in our soil. THIS IS THE TIME.
Put a message out there announcing the first US league that would implement pro/rel,that woould give you(new NASL) a great fan support and gain you huge international image.
Fans,write blogs,make calls.Lets make some NOISEEEEEE.We may not have an opportunity like this in a while.
In order to solve problems you have to go to the root. US soccer will never be what it should be with this USSF.
You can fool some people some time,but you cannot fool all the people all the time.
Roger.
The 8 team excuse is a cop-out, since we know the USSF has ignored it before. Wussy wussy wussy.
Or you can just be a fool. You know who you are Roger.
there will never be pro/rel in US soccer anytime in the foreseeable future (as in the next 20 years).
1) no current MSL owner is going to risk their $40M franchise fee to be relegated down to 2nd division
2) where are all the soccer specific stadiums with 20k+ seating capacity
baby steps people……let’s first get a viable 2nd division and go from there.
very confused!
On one hand, Im reading about Tampa Bay Rowdies player combines at Liverpool FC while on the other, watching the USSF shut everyone down (maybe!)
Im not quite sure what to think.
Just for fun…and since most of you are very informed and worthy to humor me, what would you give as a ‘percent chance’ that I could ‘obtain’ a ticket to watch a Tampa Bay Rowdies game this Spring? at any level, mind you…Im not picky!
I believe that the news here is that for the first time we heard that USL 1st Division is not anymore the Division II of US soccer.
I consider this an important step for NASL intents, and I believe that at NuRock should not be that happy.
At the same time, at least for this year, an agreement sounds to be the only chance, unless the NuRock’s guys get smart and try to recover what they paid to Nike (grrr, I hope the new league get a sponsorship with Adidas, Under Armour, Admiral or whoever else!) while selling USL to the NASL owners.
Absolutely the correct decision.
Never will there be promotion/relegation in MLS. It’s not done in American sport, and nobody is going to invest in the league if there’s a chance their team will drop down to Division 2. It’s a non-starter.
Yeah a compromise for to entities that hate each other!!! Thats going to be a very stable league and division 2 will grow from there (hint the sarcasim)
So what the heck has USSF been doing for the past month?
I was under the impression they were making a decision on this mess. Instead, they kick it back to the owners.
What happens in 7 days if the owners don’t reach a compromise? Will USSF just cancel the season, or will they grow a pair and actually make a decision about the sport they’re supposed to be governong?
This is about as bad as the MLB All-Star game ending in a tie a few years back.
A surprising decision. Not because it is a bad one, but because USSF made it. This is USSF’s way of telling them to work together or hit the road. Most likely scenario at this point is that they actually work toward a compromise. As BQ mentioned in an earlier story, NOW the only workable solution is compromise at this point.
USL can still hope that the courts step in and require previously bound clubs to play within the USL structure. Unless the USL contracts are poorly and/or vaguely written, the ownership groups of the previous USL clubs could be forced to pay damages, which will keep them at the table. USL, without enough teams, will be forced to keep negotiating or loose their entire investment.
Soon, if not already, both sides will get serious about negotiating, and be heading back to USSF with a new proposal within 15 days. I hope.
Actually, I see this decision as more friendly to NASL than to USL, although both are being taken out to the woodshed. The USL position has been all along that they are the existing D2 league and that they can just “run the clock out” and delay recognition of the NASL, leaving them as the only viable option. Clearly, they wanted to win by default without competing in the marketplace.
This decision removed the only claim to legitimacy USL1 had and removes the major selling point they could give to recruit new professional franchises and woo back defecting franchises (Montreal, Vancouver, etc). It hurts USL far more than NASL, which is still a work in progress. It also gives (I believe, although I am not a lawyer) some ammunition to allow those teams defecting to NASL to get out of their USL contracts, as they can now argue that those contracts should be voided due to a material change in circumstances (losing sanctioning).
USSF clearly wants both sides to sit down and work something out, and this finally gives USL true motivation to work for that compromise (and NASL too).
Note also that the press release specifically names the NASL as the NASL – not TOA or defecting franchises, etc. They are signalling that, while they can not sanction NASL at this time, the new league does exist in their eyes as a league. That should be a wakeup call to USL.
Good stuff Steve
Can somebody explain the downsides (from a business perspective) to either the TOA or USL fielding an unsanctioned D2 league? Obviously, there are a lot of folks with philosophical opinions but do those really matter to the D2 league/team businesses? For example, will people not buy tickets? Will these leagues not be able to get TV contracts? Will those teams not be able to get players?
As I’ve heard somewhere, these teams may/will not be allowed in the US Open Cup. While this is an important event for D2 teams and players, it doesn’t seem like a show stopper from a business perspective.
I feel like I’m missing something basic here. Can somebody fill me in?
I don’t think playing unsanctioned is a real option. I don’t think the players will risk their careers to participate.
There are some good comments here. I agree with the observations that this recognizes the NASL as a viable option, and hopefully opens a loophole for the more cautious USL1 teams to skip out of the league and join the NASL.
From my perspective, the best solution would be for the non-East coast USL1 teams to leave and join the NASL, getting them over the “8 team requirement”, while the East coast USL1 teams drop down to participate in USL2, which could just become “USL” (and be the recognized US D3) then. Puerto Rico has the most options here, as they could feasibly play in NASL, either USL (not sure if the rest of USL2 could afford the extra commute, though), or drop down to the Puerto Rico league (although I don’t think this drop in competition would suit their ambitions).
If the above doesn’t happen… even if there is “compromise” that sees the NASL teams play in USL1 for another season… certainly next season, we would be facing this all over again? The USL1 owners don’t seem to be willing to make the compromises the TOA demanded… best to get this settled, now, unless the USSF really just wants to get rid of an established D2 for a year so they can bring in a D2 MLS next year.
Any way, it’s not up to us – we’ll see what happens. As always, there’s got to be a lot going on that we don’t know about…
DaveL, As stated by others, players and agents will refuse to or allow their players they represent play for unsanctioned leagues in some situations. Last year the MN Thunder had a Haitian international playing for their team who left and played for Haiti in the Gold Cup and did quite well. If you’re playing for an unsanctioned team you don’t play internationally. There are a number of Canadian internationals who played in USL-1 last year as was also true for the Puerto Rico Islanders.
As I have pointed out here many times, playing unsanctioned may not mean a lot here in the US because you would miss the US Open Cup. While I wish US Soccer would promote that tournament more, for now, it is what it is and it would not be earth shattering to not participate. But for teams in Canada and the Islanders it really would be devastating in terms of the Canadian Voyagers Cup and the Caribbean Cup in which Vancouver, Montreal and the Islander perspectively compete to play in CONCACAF Champions League play. The publicity and extra revenue is huge for these teams. Those three teams WILL NOT play unsanctioned.
If Vancouver and Montreal get sanctioned by the CSA as individual teams (as has been reported may happen). What is stopping them from being “affiliated members” of the CSA sanctioned CSL? And, how can they not, in turn, be an “affiliated member” of the NASL?
So you can still see an unsanctioned league based in the USA, but have two affiliated members based in Canada.
Thoughts on this idea?
I like Steve Knudsen’s comments. I agree that USSF gave a lifeline to NASL in their decision. Perhaps the USL, needed an event like this to hold them more accountable to USSF and to their fans. In an email exchange with Chris Economides (Senior Director of USL1) I found out that USL will indeed proceed and are very interested in a compromise. USL is quite sure that the 2010 season plans will be resolved in a week’s time. Economides was very frank and prompt in sharing his thoughts. I felt he was genuine, but the reality is that nobody knows what can happen when there’s so much tension and so much at stake.
It’s really sad to me that fans, players, and true soccer media do not get any input at all in this discussion. This is yet another clear indication that profit-driven individuals run the state of soccer in this country. We need to be more vocal and visible. I for one will not support an unsanctioned team. It perpetuates the societal fault of selfish individualism.
Check out what Duane is writing about this at the 24th Minute. http://bit.ly/84zXxQ
@Roger.
For about the 136 millionth time Relegation/Promotion will never happen in MLS. In addition to Joe Soccer’s reasons about jeopardizing franchise value, I don’t think there are very many (soon to be former?) USL stadiums that are up to MLS quality, and there aren’t enough SSS’s in the country to ensure a venue for suddenly promoted teams.
Maybe somewhere down the line (Tom’s 20 year suggestion may be plausible), but I would see that going down as a result of an expansion of MLS to 32ish teams and then splitting that into 2 divisions, not the result of having to force teams that exist only because they can be started with a considerably smaller investment, and play in considerably smaller venues.
Furthermore, Roger, the MLS did do away with the countdown clock and the shootout earlier this decade (now if only the NHL would follow suit), it’s not like MLS is as inflexible as you portray them in your comment.
And while I do admire the european model of how they handle their structure, I don’t have a problem with soccer borrowing from the american model of other sports leagues. Especially because league soccer does not have the 150 year history in america. I think there’s something uniquely north american about choosing which players to promote (a la baseball and hockey) instead of choosing entire teams. Perhaps a more direct affiliation model would be more beneficial.