Austin Aztex Not Committing and Rochester Rhinos Sorting Out Their Options; A USSF D2 & D3 Update
Edited 9-3-10 – 10:00 a.m.
A couple of important D2 stories hit the internet this week. First was Mike Blake’s story in the Cary News. Blake interviewed the Carolina RailHawks’ majority owner Selby Wellman who let the cat out of the bag that Puerto Rico has switched alliances from the United Soccer Leagues (USL) to the North American Soccer League (NASL).
However, an article out of Puerto Rico disputes that information. It states that Isaac “Sao” Nieves, Vice-President of Operations for the Islander, said Wellmans’s assertion is “premature” and that the decision is “not official.” He acknowledged a meeting with the NASL saying that the organization “have some good ideas.” But he explained that the Islanders board of directors have not finalized their decision.
In an August 9th meeting, US Soccer laid down tough new standards for anyone who wants to sanction the league and the owners who want to participate. The NASL and its teams seem to be struggling to find enough ownership groups to qualify for sanctioning. USSF has asked for 8 teams minimum which is also a FIFA standard. Among other new standards is a requirement that the sanctioning league have teams in 2 separate time zones the first year of operation. New rules also require a 35% majority owner of each team who has a net worth of $20 million. A performance bond of $750 thousand must be paid 90 days in advance of the season by each club. Bids for sanctioning must be submitted by September 15.
On the surface it looks to be an advantage for the NASL to become partners with the Puerto Rico Islanders who have been in the league since 2004 and have had great regional success in the CONCACAF Champions League. A closer look reveals the Islanders do not meet the USSF Standards. The Islanders have a soccer specific stadium and claim they can produce the bond, but admit they do not have any one owner worth the $20 million. The team is owned by at least 8 different partners.
Another problem with the Islanders is they are looked upon as a non-US team. Puerto Rico has its own soccer federation. Part of the new standards states 75% of the teams in the league need to be from the US. The successful Montreal Impact will be in D2 one more year before moving to MLS in 2012. FC Edmonton is also part of the NASL partnership (as is Montreal) but Edmonton, who have played a exhibition season this year in preparation for their addition into the D2 league next year, might be in doubt. Especially if the USSF makes an exception and allows Puerto Rico a waiver to play in 2010. If the NASL could come up with 6 teams next year, that would mean only two could be from outside the US. While Edmonton can make the requirements, it might be prudent of USSF to waive Puerto Rico this season and allow Edmonton to come into the league in 2012 when Montreal leaves. This would also give the Islanders a year to find stronger investors.
With Puerto Rico’s allegiance switch there are now 11 teams associated with the organization. Carolina, Baltimore, Miami, Montreal, Minnesota, Puerto Rico, Rochester, St. Louis, Tampa Bay, Vancouver and expansion franchise FC Edmonton. However, Vancouver heads to MLS in 2010. AC St. Louis and Crystal Palace Baltimore have had financial problems and neither can currently pass the financial standards set by USSF. The NSC Minnesota Stars have not had financial problems but they are not able to pass the standards either and are looking for an investor in order to keep the team running next year.
In the interview Wellman admits the NASL does not have enough teams that make the USSF grade. “There are six of us who meet all of the standards, so we’re two short,” Wellman said. “The candidates [who do not meet all of the standards] would be St. Louis, Baltimore, Puerto Rico and Minnesota, who are not in the core six.”
That leaves only Carolina, Miami, Montreal, Rochester, Tampa Bay, and FC Edmonton.
And it gets worse. The Austin Aztex have stated they will not affiliate with the NASL for now and the Rochester Rhinos have recently gone on record saying they are weighing their options for next season.
The NASL had been courting the Austin Aztex owner Phil Rawlins. Before the USSF meeting on August 9th, Wellman and Rawlins met. The NASL hoped Wellman could convince the Austin owner to join the NASL. Rawlins remained unswayed and has not showed his hand to either the USL or the NASL. Many believe the USL will not even make a bid for the league and Rawlins admitted yesterday in an article written by Nick Barbaro of the Austin Chronicle that he has no confidence in the NASL.
“Austin Aztex are not an NASL-affiliated club and as such will not be participating in their proposal,” said Rawlins. “The NASL bid fails to meet several of the criteria laid down as ‘mandatory’ for sanctioning by the USSF.”
Some sources have shared their belief that the USSF will sanction the league again next year. However, US Soccer President Sunil Gulati specifically said they would not sanction the league for more than one year in an address last January. Those same sources have stated they believe US Soccer will not allow D2 soccer to go dark in a year where they are bidding for a World Cup.
Another source told IMS they also believe the USSF will sanction the league because it has not been as much work to administer the league as originally thought. In fact the USSF estimated the cost of running the league at $50 thousand per team at the start of the year. With the season nearly complete, US Soccer has now cut that estimate in half.
The USL will be holding a meeting on September 8th in Tampa, Florida. According to a USL spokesperson, “the meeting will gather team owners and executives from the USL professional division and will cover a wide range of topics for 2011 and beyond.”
All current USL-2 owners (the league will be renamed USL Pro-Championship Division for next season) have been invited to the meeting. USL have only 6 teams in their 3rd division league this season but have stated they plan to expand with new teams and a possible conference on the West Coast.
Rochester Rhino’s owner Rob Clark has confirmed he will be attending the USL meetings but emphasized that he is only in the exploratory stage for the Rhinos. “We have made no decisions for 2011,” said Clark. “I’m going to absorb all of the alternatives for the Rhinos should we choose not to participate in D2 next year. If the USL D3 league and its owners have their house in order and more importantly make decisions that “make sense” consistently, then I will have a very hard decision to make this off season.”
Rawlins also plans on attending the USL meeting even though the Aztex organization still have no plans to play anything but D2 soccer in 2011. Djorn Buchholz, CEO of the Aztex, has stated previously to IMS that Austin’s plan is to compete in D2 soccer next season.
Comments are closed.
If PRI can get a waiver to play because it does not meet the financial requirement, I would think that it stands to reason that non-American teams could also get a waiver to allow them to play even if it put the league above the 25% rule. If it’s the difference between playing a season with 30% non-American teams and not playing the season at all it doesn’t seem like much of a choice.
There are so many Canadian investors that the NASL is talking to that I can’t see there not being a way around the rule on a year to year basis. .
I was directly told that the 25% rule has always been in place, by the way…
Yes, but there were lots of things not enforced by US Soccer in the past that I know they will be more diligent about now.
I just don’t see them making a bunch of exceptions Duane. I could be wrong but it sure seemed like they were pretty serious about the standards.
If the NASL gets sanctioning for D2, what’s the likelihood that the USL will keep D2 as part of their system in the long term? Seems to me that they’re focusing on the USL-2 (renaming it “Pro Championship Division” seems to also put a nail in the USL-1 coffin) and lower leagues. I wouldn’t want to say that they’re admitting D2 defeat, but more like they’re realizing that it’s pretty much out of their hands. They’ve got Austin on their side, as well as New York, Orlando, and Antigua. Hardly enough to apply for D2, and one would assume that if they’re serious about playing in D2, they’ll go to whoever has the D2 sanctioning.
Wake me up when it’s over…ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ
Brian, the link to the Cary News story is broken. Here’s the correct one:
http://blogs.newsobserver.com/swakesports/nasl-to-submit-its-bid-for-league-this-week
Nice work, as usual. Thanks very much.
I really do not see how PR’s “federation” makes them a non-US team. Last time I checked Puerto Rico was part of the United States. We have all read the USSF rules–it does not say a thing about federations, it only makes the distincition between US and non-US teams.
Let’s think of it this way. I, an American citizen, can legally travel to PR without my US passport. This is something I can only do becuase PR is a part of the UNITED STATES. Seriously, it is just like saying that DC United is a non-US team because they are located inside Washington, DC. Remember, the District of Columbia is NOT a state, it is just a federal district. Essentially they have the same legal status as PR–well, I guess we did not have to beat the Spanish in 1898 to take possession of Washington, DC.
Hmm, I am confused, or maybe I need to bring my passport with me at the end of the month when I go out to Washington, DC?
I think the new USL Pro Championship Division will be the new USL-2 in a sense. You build those teams into a strong regional leagues and perhaps the strongest of those teams eventually move up to a new/different 2nd division? All mere speculation on my part. The USL are not big into sharing their future plans with us.
I am pretty sure there will be some interesting news coming from USL after the meeting on the 8th.
Soccer Boy, I understand your point about being US Citizenship and that should trump having a different Federation. I definitely see the merit in the argument. The DCU example, creative but apple and oranges since they are a member of the USSF. So it’s not really even close.
If the USSF is going to continue give a foreign based waiver to the Islanders, I can understand that given the nature of the shared citizenship and passport.
Part of decinding to run your own sports feds comes along with the fact that you have chosen to be “sovereign” for the purpose of sport because you believe that it provides you with certain advantadges in the long run. It also comes with some risks. Like being told that you can’t get a “foreign” exemption waiver or having to follow USSF rules because you decided to play in a league sanctioned by the USSF.
You have to prepared to take the “good” with the “bad” when you decide to run your own shop.
It makes for interesting conversation, but in the end, I am not so much concerned about the foreign club allocation when it comes to the USSF with Islanders. It is the stadium and the capital requirments that are of much more concern to me…
That is what they are really going to need an exemption for.
This soap opera just keeps on churning out episodes.
Until Islanders management verifies that they switched allegiances, I won’t believe it. It’s not like Selby hasn’t been wrong before.
I’m not saying that it is impossible because orgaizations usually do what is in what they have deemed to be in their self-interest but it obvioulsy would be a huge, seismic shift in the conversations that I had with them a few months back.
Of course, the circumstances have changed. A lot…
Yankiboy, I wrote “The cats out of the bag” because it’s been known for some time that PR was going to partner with NASL, but was supposedly OTR. Wellman suddenly made it on the record which surprised more than just me. But they have definitely switched allegiances. I’m guessing primarily because there is little chance of USL having enough teams to bid for D2 and PR feels they need to be playing D2.
Oh, and as yankiboy stated, there are consequences. No more Champions League play for Islanders or any of the PR teams if they came under the auspices of US Soccer. No Caribbean competition etc… I don’t think that would fly in PR.
I find it interesting that Austin & Rochester are both keeping their options open for next year. These are two of the teams that meet all of the USSF criteria for 2011 and they aren’t sure about the NASL? It’s pure speculation on my part but that has to mean something! Is there something going on within the NASL that we don’t know about that is keeping these two teams on the fence?
No one has ever said NASL was without their faults. The Cooper fallout this year being just one of the issues.
Austin has been positioning themselves neutral for some time in order to get the best deal for the Aztex.
Rochester was upset with the USSF D2 standards. Even Rawlins of the Aztex thinks the bond is far too high as do most of the team owners. They don’t have as much issue with the 20 mil as they do with the bond of 750K. Thats a lot of your money to take out of circulation to assure things for USSF.
Rochester and Austin are two teams in the most admirable position or as I have been saying, they are both in the cat bird seat. Everyone wants them on their side for different reasons. Why wouldn’t they hold their options open? These guys didn’t get to where they are today by not being shrewd.
BQ: Attached is a link to an article written by Esteban Pagan one of the the Puerto Rican press equivalents of Brian Quarstad (Pagan is tenacious at getting to the bottom of things and in the opinion of many one of the two best futbol reporters in Puerto Rico):
http://www.primerahora.com/¿posiblecambiodelosislanders?-416042.html
In the article Isaac “Sao” Nieves (Vice-President of Operations)categorized that Selby’s assertion is “premature” and that the team board still needs to make a decision. He also verifies that they have met with the NASL and stated that “they are looking good have some good ideas”.
Pagan states that nobadoy down on the Island had any idea until Selby let the cat out of the bag.
If pagan didn’t knew, I feel a little less shocked by not knowing. Of coures, if I did know then I would have had to just zip it anyway until they wanted it known or it got leaked by someone else.
Which is why it is often more fun for me to not know. I make it a point to not ask too many “intimate” questions about Puerto Rico or Baltimore…
As I commented on another post, I love IMS readers. Great find yankiboy!!! I so wish I had learned Spanish. I need to take lessons. Anyway…
Run through Babelfish- you will have to read between the interpretation on some of this.
So it seems that the Islanders of Puerto Rico will change of side. Or, at least, that is what they love the owners of North American Soccer League (NASL). In a surprise one moved, the Puerto Rican club was including in the list of 10 equipment that will comprise of season 2011 in the NASL, league that looks for the endorsement of the Federation of Soccer of the United States (USSF) to be named like the second official division of North American soccer. The NASL, formed by owners who left United Soccer Leagues (USL) by differences with the administration, will send this week their plan of work to the USSF. “(The Islanders) they have not done more nothing than to play a high level and represent our league in a high level”, said to the owner of the RailHawks de Carolina and civil servant of the NASL, Selby Wellman, to the newspaper News Observer, of Carolina of the North. Until yesterday, the management of the Troops Orange one had been in favor of remaining in the USL, although the majority of the equipment has announced his I jump to the NASL. In fact, the vice-president of operations of the Islanders, Isaac “Sao” Snows, catalogued the announcement of the NASL like “premature”. “Still that is not official”, said Snows yesterday first thing. “That one is a decision of the Meeting that has still not been taken. We must give the space”, added the industralist, who yes revealed that he has met with personnel of the NASL. “They are seen very well and has good ideas”, emphasized. The present season of the Second Division gambles under the supervision of the USSF, and it hopes that in the month of October the organism makes a decision on which league it will be guaranteed.
“The NSC Minnesota Stars have not had financial problems”
Wouldn’t you consider estimated losses over $100,000 to be a “financial problem?”
@yankiboy, the USSF requirements say nothing about your “federation,” it only lists country of origin. Quite frankly, I think USSF needs better legal counsel. I guess if I had an urge to live in Chicago I would apply.
BQ: The Ole Yanki-Yank quick synopsis (typos and all) was intended to try and spare y’all the torture of the Babblefish.
Things have definitely changed since the last time I asked.
Eoconomides, Holt and Marcos have even more problems now. Barracuda couldn’t travel to Montreal to repay the favor of the friendly with the Impact; The Caribbean Superleague that Marcos had been exploring in Puerto Rico that would possibly include several teams from the Puerto Rico was almost dead on arrival (not a surpise seeing how the Puerto Rican Pro League the PRSL did it’s best USL1 imitation and split in two after playing only two seasons). Austin is going to go wherever the second division action is. Rochester might do the same or drop down.
But that’s ok–The I-League is gonna save the USL pro ranks (wink, wink) and the USL has a lot of teams in the pipeline (better be a third division pipeline)…
@Soccerboy: What will it take to help get you there? I will make the first donation and get the grassroots movement going.
I got paid today and I got an extra $40 (if I am lucky) after I pay my creditors. Unless there is a miracle (and how I hope and pray there is one)–I can add to that the cost of the money that I budgeted for my 2011 Baltimore season ticket package so that we can make it two bill and some change…
Second division soccer lovers could use another man in CHI-Town.
MN Soccer Guy, If the Stars have lost only 100 k then they most likely have the lowest loses in the league except for the few teams that are drawing an average of 5K attendance or better ie.. Montreal and Portland. In D2 that’s hardly looked at as financial problems. What did Gulati say last January about real expectations for teams in D2?
For the Stars that perhaps is a problem. But were talking the difference between teams that couldn’t make payroll and dipped into USSF money and the Stars who have not gone into a financial tailspin. I think there’s a huge difference. Tell me you didn’t take hits that big or larger than that when you were with the Thunder years ago.
great more anti NASL bias from IMS.
@joe LeForte:
Anti-NASL bias? You’re joking, right?
All I see here is a presentation of all of the facts that IMS has. It’s not anti- or pro- anything. It just is.
I’m not from Minnesota – far from it. I don’t follow Minnesota soccer, just pro soccer in general. And IMS, far and away, has provided the best, most consistent, most in-depth, and most complete news and analysis on the lower pro leagues that I have found anywhere. That’s why I keep coming back.
The only bias I’ve seen on this site is that he covers a lot of Minnesota soccer. And given the name on the top of the page, that shouldn’t come as much of a shocker.
@joe LeForte: Where was there any “anti NASL bias from IMS”?
I must have missed those blog entries. I would very interested in reading it…
@Jim – For the record, Austin doesn’t meet all the USSF requirements. They will be playing in House Park for the foreseeable future. It’s 110 yards long. But only about 60 yards wide. As a guess. Whatever it is, it’s definitely thinner than the required 70. So they’ll need a waiver for their stadium.
Which they will get. As I have posted at IMS, Buchholz has gone on record saying they have a 3-year plan (and always have had) to start plans on a SSS in Austin. I don’t think that will be an issue with US Soccer. You are correct in that they will need a waiver but they will get one.
I agree, losses of 100K for the Stars probably is on the low end:
Break-even attendance = 2,500-3,000
Current attendance = 1,390
Difference = 1,100-1,600
Avg ticket price (est.) = $10
Home games = 15
Estimated losses = $165,000-$240,000
I’m sure the Thunder lost that much during certain years, although detailed financial information never made it past owner/GM.
I take issue with the premise on IMS that NSC has been markedly more financially responsible than other clubs. I think it was financially irresponsible to join the league this year on such short notice. It would have made a lot more sense to play an exhibition schedule in 2010.
“I take issue with the premise on IMS”
Huh, for a minute there I thought you were going to defend me in the accusation that I’m USL biased. I guess not. ;(
My head hurts.
1st Prediction: Sept. 8 USL meetings result in a more substantial D3 league with Rochester & Carolina joining it.
2nd Prediction: PR joins D3 league by September b/c NASL can’t get their act together and D3 sits in their region.
3rd Prediction: Can’t form a D3 league on the West Coast. PDL teams won’t pony up. Economy still in the tank and they want to be cautious.
4th Prediction: NASL won’t meet requirements for D2 league.
5th Prediction: Emergency meetings held by USSF on D2 with MLS reps and NASL reps in attendance.
Can anyone say MLS Reserve League?
why would rochester be in d3?
Well, your head is going to hurt worse after this.
1st Prediction: Sept. 8 USL meetings result in a more substantial D3 league with Rochester & Carolina joining it.
Clark won’t decide anything until after the season. His team is playoff bound and should go deep.
Wellman wants nothing to do with USL and USL wants nothing to do with Wellman.
2nd Prediction: PR joins D3 league by September b/c NASL can’t get their act together and D3 sits in their region.
PR most likely will go with NASL but if they do not get the bid they will ask to play in a USSF Sanctioned league. If no D2 at all they go back to USL and play D3 as said. However, that decision is still a long way off.
3rd Prediction: Can’t form a D3 league on the West Coast. PDL teams won’t pony up. Economy still in the tank and they want to be cautious.
Possible? They have been working on a West Coast league for quite some time and Holt announced it in an interview he did with me back in April I believe.
4th Prediction: NASL won’t meet requirements for D2 league.
Possible.
5th Prediction: Emergency meetings held by USSF on D2 with MLS reps and NASL reps in attendance.
Can anyone say MLS Reserve League?
See IMS for new Adidas contract with MLS. See article today from Lisa Eisenmenger concerning reserve league: http://is.gd/eT7QJ
As stated here previously, at this point and time MLS has no interest in partnering with NASL D2. D3 would be more likely but even though a reserve league will most likely be started again next year I don’t think any formal partnerships will happen until next summer. At least so I’ve been told by an MLS person.
D3 is primarily an East Coast league which would work well for them. Please see 4-part series on Rethinking D2 Soccer in North America that I did. Read part 3 about regionalizing leagues and what Charleston did this year. That will explain why the Rhinos would possibly want to go to D3. That and the other items I mentioned already in this comment thread.
I think BQ’s assertions about NSC being fiscially responsible are accurate. They have a lot less overhead than most clubs do–training facility they own, stadium they own, staff mostly in place–although I would image they are putting in extra hours, etc. They also have not gone out like some teams on the verge of bankruptcy and bought talent to try and make the play-offs.
It will be interesting to see what the meeting in USL will be all about.
As to the West coast USL2, this was on a blog today out of the Northwest and looks to be on hiatus
http://www.examiner.com/soccer-in-seattle/kitsap-pumas-ponder-top-moments-of-2010-how-to-build-on-them-for-2011
” It appears plans to move up to a completely new all-professional USL western conference are on hold for Kitsap, though they might play some kind of transitional “mixed” schedule in 2011.
Waite came to Bremerton with a list of goals and a timeline for accomplishing them. He admits local support is developing more slowly than he’d hoped. “We are about one year behind where I thought we would be, as you know it is a work in progress”
I had really hoped that after last off-season we were done with all of this guess work–or at least on our way to being done. Now it seems like things might be even more up in the air than they were then.
As for the replacement of D2 by a reserve league, I’m just not sure I understand the logic behind the notion. As BQ said, USSF won’t want to let D2 go dark during a World Cup bid. Furthermore, a reserve league is not a division 2. The season is much shorter, the players are younger and have a greater ability to move up to the first team, and they play games almost exclusively based on the first team’s schedule.
The strength of D2 is that it can be places that MLS is not. This fact alone is good for the (long term) future of soccer in the US no matter the benefits of a strong reserve league.
Not to go off on a tangent, but…
Why not an MLS reserve league that takes a form more similar to minor league baseball, wherein the “farm teams” do not share facilities with the “parent” club and can play in markets where the big league does not operate?
If there were (3-5 years from now) a 20-team MLS, with a 20-team reserve league at the D-2 level (playing a very regionalized schedule to lessen travel cost and related burdens) and D-3 affiliates and the USSF academy for “elite youth players” and NCAA/PDL (amateur U-23 summer league) as a feeder system, what’s wrong with that? I think one of the biggest flaws in the recent realities of minor league soccer in the U.S. has been the lack of coordination between the lower levels of the pyramid and the top tier. I see the current set-up as a lot of players being asked prematurely to jump in at the top of the pyramid and then spilling down to the lower tiers when they can’t cut it there, but most often struggling to progress back up to the top. The number of players who have worked their way from the D-2 or D-3 level to become MLS contributors has become a very, very small trickle. That may be an inherent flaw in the age of many American players entering the pyramid too late (post-college), but ultimately, the “pyramid” needs to evolve to have a greater role in developing more players so they can move from the bottom up to the top.
Otherwise a big transitional question will be working out the issue of whether someone that’s a D-2 farm team can be an independently-owned franchise or whether it falls under the single-entity MLS structure where the league owns 51% and the investor-operator has a 49% share. By that I’m thinking of the Austin Aztex as the equivalent of the St. Paul Saints who do not have an MLB parent, yet still compete at the higher levels of the minor league. I can’t see them wanting to be a 49% investor in the franchise they founded, but that may be the answer for solving the ownership question for the Minnesotas and Puerto Ricos of D-2 – MLS being the entity that owns over 35%, with net worth over $20 mil and fronts the $750k bond. Alternatively, you could have an investment from a foreign club (hopefully better off financially than Crystal Palace) taking a role in that and loaning their developmental players into the D-2 or D-3 club.
If there were a direct affiliation – just hypotheticals – between say Chicago (MLS) and Minnesota (D-2) and Milwaukee (D-3) or Columbus (MLS) and Rochester (D-2) and Pittsburgh (D-3) that would be the equivalent of the Rochester Red Wings being the AAA and New Britain Rock Cats at the AA level affiliate of the Minnesota Twins (MLB). I think that model helps bring national interest to the big league club, as now the fans in Rochester, NY, & New Britain, CT, have a reason to follow the team in Minnesota because there are familiar faces there – that builds the national footprint and tv audience for the major league, which MLS has been missing to this point.
Alternatively, you could have the concept of a minor league that is heavily populated with players on loan from the top league, but not have a one-to-one correlation in terms of “parent-child” clubs. Chicago can loan out a defender to one club and a midfielder to another one, where-ever the coaching or available minutes best meet the developmental needs of the player and his top-level club.
If the goal of a reserve league is to get playing time for the players who are not yet ready to play at the top level (or players needing to work themselves into fitness after an injury lay-off), then a reincarnation of the old MLS reserve league I think falls far short of what is needed.
Do FIFA/USSF regulations on player transfers allow the structure I describe? It seems like the loan concept and roster freeze dates do the trick to a certain extent.
Obviously the scale of today’s minor league baseball structure is far beyond that of soccer (and probably always will be), but I think conceptually, that is where the goal should be to progress toward that long-term set-up.
It’s not necessarily going to result in every roster spot being taken by someone younger. You’ll still have career minor league journeymen, as you do in baseball, but hopefully there’d be more upward mobility for the kid who progresses from U-16 academy to U-18 academy to NCAA/PDL (which some will skip) to D-3 to D-2 and ultimately MLS.
Trevor,
Reserve sides in Spain can play up to their second division. Reserve sides in Germany can play in their third division. Having Reserve teams in a league does not eliminate the league’s existence.
I know of a wise soccer observer in the TC area who has promoted the concept of a D2/MLS Reserve league. From my understanding, there would be some sort of mix between the D2 teams and the MLS Reserves within a league structure. One point this wise person has made is that from a D2 prespective, it would draw a ton of fans to a match if their D2 team was playing an MLS Reserve team. Take for example two years ago when the Thunder played the KC Wizards–what a fun evening.
I think this is something that should be explored.
Where to begin:
How about a scenario of this proportion:
1. NASL applies for D-2 status and is denied due to lack of ability to adhere to the new standards.
2. NASL then applies for D-3 status as the only way they can play.
3. USL then applies for D-2 status, and much like the beginning days of MLS, fields 5 or 6 teams to get the league going. Question, do they have the net worth requirement to do so? Answer, I believe the new Owners, based upon some basic background reviews on the internet, can easily do so for 6 or even 8 teams (these are some very rich people, folks).
So, much like MLS in the beginning, USL gains the D-2 sanctioning through volume while NASL is in the D-3 position.
4. Wellman from Carolina finally realizes that he is losing so much money that he saves face by shutting down because NASL is only D-3.
5. Davidson from Miami gets fired from Traffic because he got them into this stupid place to begin with, and starts selling hot dogs outside the MLS offices in New York.
6. Puerto Rico finally gains their senses and applies for sanctioning with Brazil.
There are so many combinations out here, it really is too hard to tell.
I think some people are reading WAY to much into this. The options are NASL or USL. Thats it. A reserve league is a reserve league not a division.
In my opinion, this is getting ridiculous. The USSF has asked for too much. Let’s say they change the financial requirements to $10 mil and $500 k; how would that change the picture. The SSS requirement could be dealt with on a team by team basis. The 75% US teams requirement could be dealt with on a season by season basis.
I think Austin and Rochester find themselves in a difficult predicament. Both of them are great clubs – possibly the best in this D2 soap opera – who are without much chance of getting MLS spots. I wonder if the ownership of Montreal (even Vancouver to some extent) would’ve pushed so hard for the defection from USL to the re-birth of NASL if they had secured the MLS spot? Maybe…maybe not!
It’d be sad to see Rochester, Austin, & Puerto Rico go down to D3, because they’ve been able to field great teams. I believe they will eventually join NASL.
The best joke would be if the Canadian and Puerto Rican Federations would get together and sanction a North American D2 league consisting of much of the same requirements as listed by USSF, save the absurd $20 mil and, naturally, the 75% US teams requirement. lol lol
The other great joke is if the NASL & USL simply tell USSF – thanks but no thanks – and simply run D2 level leagues without seeking sanctioning. lol
The ‘joke’ options would obviously eliminate the US teams from the Open Cup. Not a good idea!
The other issue is that the USSF did not establish D3 (and even beyond) standards at the same time. That would’ve helped…perhaps.
BQ – for comparison purposes, it be great to find and publish the MLS requirements.
The MLS Requirments? A $40 mil fee and rising!
maybe i have missed this, but i see no mention of Atlanta. they are still part of NASL from what i see in their site.
They have decided not to play this year.
Bart, MLS didn’t start with 5 or 6 teams. So what is it that you are speaking about?
MLS started with Lamar Hunt owning the bulk of the teams.
Bart -
Not exactly. There was a lot of “owners running multiple teams” but it wasn’t necessarily the Hunts. I believe they’ve only ever been involved with Columbus, Kansas City and Dallas, so they never exceeded 30% of the league.
The Krafts had the Revolution plus the Earthquakes for a time, didn’t they?
AEG, meanwhile, was originally just the owner of Colorado, but went on to own a number of teams at various times (including NY/NJ, D.C., Chicago, the San Jose franchise that is now in Houston) – I think they might’ve hit 50% for a brief period. They’re now only involved with the Galaxy and the Dynamo.