Skip to content

USSF Board of Directors Narrowly Approves 1-year Provisional Sanctioning of NASL; AGM Must Still Ratify

2011 February 12

In a narrow 6-5 vote with both U.S. Soccer President Sunil Gulati and MLS Commissioner Don Garber abstaining, the USSF Board of Directors approved the North American Soccer League (NASL) to provisionally sanction Division 2 pro soccer in the U.S. for 2011. The approval came with a special 1-year provisional status and must be ratified in today’s Annual General Meeting in Las Vegas, Nevada.

According to sources close to the situation, U.S. Soccer’s review committee made up of Carlos Cordeiro, Executive Vice President Mike Edwards and Secretary General Dan Flynn met with NASL executives on Thursday evening. The committee reviewed the NASL’s financial documents and judged whether the proposed league met the tough new U.S. Soccer standards set for division 2 pro soccer. The committee had tough questions for the NASL in Thursday evening’s meeting and NASL officials left the meeting with good reason to be concerned.

On January 20, 2011, the same committee recommended rescinding the provisional status extended to the NASL at the November board meeting in Toronto at MLS Cup. At the time, U.S. Soccer said that financial requirements were the cause of reversal of their provisional status. Since then, it’s been learned that the Carolina RailHawks financial situation and the dissolution of Triangle Professional Sports, L.L.C. and its subsidiary, Carolina RailHawks, L.L.C. was the biggest concern for the committee. The NASL has since been in the process of starting a new team in Cary, North Carolina owned by Traffic Sports USA which will carry over the RailHawks name.

When that same review committee submitted their findings to the board on Friday morning they unanimously recommended the board deny the D2 sanctioning to the proposed league.

The NASL was allowed to make a brief presentation during the executive session on Friday morning which was unusual since they were the topic of discussion.

When all was said and done the board narrowly approved the NASL provisionally for 1-year and with other restrictions and directives. The board is requiring that the league have a clear plan on how they will remove Traffic Sports USA from owning Carolina and part ownership in Atlanta. They will be allowed to continue their ownership of Miami.

Another snafu resulting from the provisional sanctioning is U.S. Open Cup competition. It is unclear at this time whether U.S.-based NASL teams will be allowed to participate in this year’s competition or if they will be allowed without the automatic berth they’ve had in the past. If the latter is true it would mean teams would have to play-in to the competition like lower level teams. Clarification of this should come with the press release expected today. That decision is not expected to affect Edmonton, Montreal or Puerto Rico who are the foreign teams involved with the NASL and who will participate in their own domestic cup competitions.

The board should be able to amend the bylaws for allowance of this special 1-year provisional sanctioning with the ratification today. While it could be a point of contention, it’s likely the AGM will ratify the board’s recommendation.

With the directive from U.S. Soccer, the NASL is in for a tough 12 months. The league still has no real front office and it begins its season in 2 months. It will have to operate the league in its inaugural season under a very watchful USSF eye. NASL CEO Aaron Davidson will need to find new owners for Atlanta, Carolina and Minnesota (a league-owned team) as well as making sure San Antonio is ready to play in 2012 when Montreal leaves for MLS.

U.S. Soccer and NASL will make a joint press release sometime today, most likely after the AGM’s conclusion this afternoon.

59 Responses
  1. fotbalist permalink
    February 12, 2011

    This is precisely what I expected to hear, and it is perhaps the only fair approach. Hopefully, today brings the same validation. I also hope that the provisional sanctioning allows the US teams to participate in the US Open Cup even if they don’t get automatic berths. I wonder if we can read anything into the fact that Gulati and Garber abstained?! Can’t wait for the news this evening!

    I’ve been wondering about a matter for a long time, but didn’t want to give BQ more work than he already has. However, I find it very interesting that we haven’t heard anything about the sanctioning of USL Pro. What sanctioning do they have? How was their review by USSF undertaken? What level of sanctioning were they granted, etc?

  2. February 12, 2011

    USL PRO was already sanctioned as USL-2 which was D3. The only thing they had to do as any returning sanctioning league needs to do is file an annual report. However, with that said US Soccer needed to create a waiver for USL PRO in that they came up just a little over the 25% foreign teams. With 15 teams that is 3.75 teams and they have 4 teams from outside the U.S.

    Interestingly enough I was told that the USL had gone to US Soccer originally with 18 teams they thought would play this year. I am hearing one of the teams from Puerto Rico is already having some financial issues.

    But we are off topic so …

  3. mikey permalink
    February 12, 2011

    Great job Brian.

  4. Steph permalink
    February 12, 2011

    ABA & NBA merge to form National Basketball Association….. NHL & WHL merge to form National Hockey League …..AFL & NFL merge to form National Football League …. …….. Whats the problem with NASL & USLPro again ……. Why can NASL & USLPro merge and form Division and have relegation within the league …. ..for example ….NASL&USLPro will merge and create the only Div-II League with Two Div within the league ( Ligue-1 with 14 team and League 2 with 14 team and have regulation within Div II league only, Not MLS) …… Thats the best situation I see for both league where USSF may except and sanction ………

  5. donald permalink
    February 12, 2011

    the teams in USL Pro do not meet US Soccer’s D2 standards

  6. February 12, 2011

    @Steph

    Because they are petty children that hate each other too much to ever work together in any constructive way.

  7. treefire permalink
    February 12, 2011

    Sorry, Steph, but before making a post like that, you should read up on the situation a little bit. The leagues will not merge any time in the near future. They are separate entities by decision and design. Even if they did, by the current system we couldn’t have them as D2 and D3 with promotion and relegation, because most of the USL teams wouldn’t meet the criteria for D2. Also, the reason many of the teams reportedly chose to be D3 in the first place was to avoid having to travel to play teams in far away markets, which would be again required if the USL merged with the NASL. They don’t want to merge, and it’s just not going to happen. If, in fact, they did try to merge in the manner you suggest, and came to the USSF with this plan of promotion and relegation, there would be no chance for them to be sanctioned as D2.

  8. Person permalink
    February 12, 2011

    Steph- USSF requires higher financial standards for D2 then USL pro can provide. No merger is possible, central ownership of usl vs team owned teams of nasl

  9. February 12, 2011

    ” I wonder if we can read anything into the fact that Gulati and Garber abstained?! ”

    I’m betting they abstained because:

    1) Their inboxes are already full,
    2) They didn’t want to seen as choosing sides,
    3) They have nothing to gain by voting – their primary concern is US Men & MLS, respectively.

  10. mikey permalink
    February 12, 2011

    @donald a couple teams easily meet D2 standards, they just want to concentrate on running their clubs and wanted a stable league to play in.

    Sadly NASL is going to have to go through this next fall/winter all over again. Its going to be tough, they need to find three investors for the teams this year without lossing any and need to find two more expansion teams for 2013. Not to mention sponsors might not want to come in under a provisional status.

  11. George in Toronto permalink
    February 12, 2011

    I hope Rochester joins NASL next year…. Ottawa is in for 2013 and Hamilton is in for 2015… so the future looks bright… This is the low point, you can only go up from here.

    I feel that USSF has a double standard when it comes to single ownership. That is the MLS model!!!!

  12. Joe permalink
    February 12, 2011

    The only reasonthey got provisional sanctioning and also the reason i suspect Garber and Gulati abstained was because of pressure from Montreal which needs to play competitively to prepare for MLS.. and Gulati is supposedly very good friends with Davidson.. it’ll be this all over again next year

  13. WSW permalink
    February 12, 2011

    I would rather have standards then no standards like USL Pro

  14. Daniel Feuerstein permalink
    February 12, 2011

    Steph is clueless about the whole NASL/USL war. But that’s o.k. That’s why we need to educate him of the real situation, not a fantasy. But personally I am happy that US Soccer will re-instate the sanctioning. I also hope they will be allowed to play in the US Open Cup this season or else it’s a brand new 1st round.

  15. WSW permalink
    February 12, 2011

    @Daniel remember on your show how you wanted the war to stop, it started again with soccersam calling out NASL fans as foreigners and that USLPro is the only”American” league.

  16. Jack D permalink
    February 12, 2011

    Sad, truly sad that Garber and Gulati abstained. For Gulati especially, it shows a true lack of leadership. He cares about soccer, knows about soccer – but as a leader he is really terrible. USSF is run by amateurs and it always shows. Garber could have and maybe should have voted to preserve NASL. American Soccer has almost no real leadership and very little unity, mostly people who care only about their fiefdoms, as Arena once said. The entire youuth structure is fractured and ridiculous and now the pro structure is as well, but maybe even more hatred between the players. Leadership would have fixed this a while ago, instead intelligent Gulati and lesser so Garber only protecting MLS’ owners, do not do anything worthwhile. WPS is on its last legs, the Women’s National Team has almost no fans left and the Men’s NT’s hardcore fanbase has been stagnant for 10 years. That’s just the top of the foodchain. Without leadership you will only see MLS grow, due to mostly owners who want to profit from the venues. It’s sad. NASL vs USL is something Gulati needed to fix – abstaining is a joke, so is his leadership.

  17. Soccer Boy permalink
    February 12, 2011

    I am curious why the MLS commissioner did not vote and decided to abstain. I guess they in a way have a fiduciary duty to Montreal as they will be moving into that league next year and I am sure there are some legal documents signed to that effect. From my perspective, if Montreal would have been forced into an unsanctioned league (or no league at all) there would be huge exposure to MLS from a legal standpoint.

    I am also dismayed at Gulati’s non-vote. He is suppose to promote soccer in the United States, right, or am I just ignorant of what the USSF is suppose to do. Assuming that he is a good friend of Davidson, he still has a duty, and to me it just shows lack of leadership not to vote on such an important topic. (To me this is the second failure this year on the part of Gulati. Maybe it is time for him to resign!)

  18. Soccer Boy permalink
    February 12, 2011

    BTW, what are these clowns doing in LV when the economy is still no strong and countless number of soccer supporters are out of work. I am sure there are a number of great locations in Chicago that could have hosted the AGM. What a joke!

  19. FSUFiji permalink
    February 12, 2011

    Hope upon hope, the NASL can run a great season and this will not happen next year. The folks who voted “no” will see their fears were unfounded and Daniel’s peace breaks out. Yeah, it must be the cold weather affecting my mind. With three PDL, two NASL and one USL Pro teams in Florida and we are hoping everyone is in the US Open. A great chance for everyone to start a rivalry with OCSC.

  20. Chris permalink
    February 12, 2011

    @George in Toronto: it’s not really a double standard. MLS has a single-entity structure, but that’s quite differnt from having a more traditional league structure without enough owners to run all the franchises, which is the NASL structure.

    @ Everyone else: the two abstentions are non-issues. Garber would have had to abstain because he has a bias on the issue. He has a vested interest in Montreal competing this year. As the President, Gulati’s abstention is probably based on Robert’s Rules of Order. The President usually only votes in the case of a tie.

  21. February 12, 2011

    Thank Chris. You are absolutely correct about the non-votes. And where did folks get that Garber is good friends with Davidson???? Where did that come from?

  22. smatthew permalink
    February 12, 2011

    Gonna hope over the good news and say I sure do hope the US based NASL clubs get to compete for the Dewars.

  23. Joe permalink
    February 12, 2011

    Gulati not garber

  24. February 12, 2011

    Sorry, typo. I meant Gulati.

  25. George in Toronto permalink
    February 12, 2011

    @Chris

    MLS struggled in the early days. If it was not for the money of 2 men, Lamar Hunt and Philip Anschutz who propped up the league, MLS would have failed. (Similar to what Traffic is trying to do today in NASL).

    Lamar Hunt owned the Kansas City Wizards, Columbus Crew, and Dallas FC.

    Philip Anschutz owned the LA Galaxy, Houston Dynamos, Chicago Fire, NY Metrostars (Red Bulls) and DC United.

    Between them they owned 7 of the 12 teams in MLS in at one time… So that’s really the hypocrisy of the USSF demanding that Traffic divest itself of multiple ownership. Lame.

    BTW, in the Canadian Football League Toronto Argonauts and BC Lions are owned by David Braley. The CFL has been able to accommodate this situation until he sells off one of his teams..

  26. Kenn permalink
    February 12, 2011

    And had Gulati and Garber actually voted, you’d have been all over them, saying they were just “protecting MLS” because the NASL is a threat.

    They were absolutely right to abstain. I’d say I can’t believe you don’t see that, but I actually can believe you don’t see that.

  27. meh permalink
    February 12, 2011

    “The board is requiring that the league have a clear plan on how they will remove Traffic Sports USA from owning Carolina and part ownership in Atlanta. They will be allowed to continue their ownership of Miami.”

    Traffic will be “allowed” to continue their ownership of Miami? WTF? Surely that can’t be phrased correctly. Is someone implying that USSF could have forced Traffic to divest itself of all ownership of all NASL teams, including the team Traffic has owned and operated for the past five years?

    Also I don’t understand why there would be any question about American NASL clubs participating in the US Open Cup. Is it an Open Cup, or isn’t it?

  28. Dan permalink
    February 12, 2011

    Or the USL people would say they are protecting MLS from their so called superior USL-Pro. LOL

  29. Steph permalink
    February 12, 2011

    Like I Said …… If I am NASL & USLPro …. I would merge and accept been a Div-3 League because the criteria setup for Div-2 by USSF (with MLS Owners) can’t only be meet by MLS Clubs

    So Yes … Leave Div-2 League void

    NASL & USLPro merging and becoming a Div-3 League …. You will force USSF hand to adjust there criteria or have USSF (with greedy MLS Owners) fund they own Div-2 League ….

    I would love to see USSF (with greedy MLS Owners) try to fund they own Div-2 League …… let them go out and find a city, stadium, players and a places that meet there criteria

    @Daniel Feuerstein …..You don’t have to be clueless to grasp and understand that having NASL sanction only for one year does not help a club bottom line …… Why would any business sponsor a club in NASL with only a year sanction for Div-2 ….Why would a fan get involved with NASL club! ………How does the uncertainty for next year help a club bottom line/budget ……

    merge and become a Div-3 league and force USSF hand to change or adjust they criteria for Div-2 league because the only team that could meet that criteria is MLS clubs ..

  30. Steph permalink
    February 12, 2011

    maybe Garber & Gulati should not be part of the committee if they choose to vote would leave people questioning there integrity (Maybe they voting protect MLS) ………I say vote Garber & Gulati and let chip fall where they may/fall ..

  31. Daniel Feuerstein permalink
    February 12, 2011

    @WSW I didn’t hear that part of the show. I caught the beginning of Brian Quarstad’s interview. I am very angry that those idiots from the Soccer Sam show that are suppose to be supporting the game are only doing one thing, they are kissing the Rhino’s rear ends which entail they are kissing the USL’s rear ends as well.

    They want raitings? They want to keep up with the Rhinos Owners? Then just call it what it is. But I will refrain from the word because this is a family site and Brian is a good guy. But you all know what I’m talking about. The Soccer Sam show is a disgrace.

    @Steph I’m not clueless, the NASL needs a chance to get their league to play in D2 & when that happens they can get new owners in the area. The Silverbacks can get Arthur Blank who owns the NFL Falcons as a part owner. Carolina Railhawks who are in Cary is not far from Raleigh. Contact the owner of the Hurricanes as a part owner Peter Cammeros. You have to talk to these people and show them that D2 is strong and one day they can get to MLS.

  32. Steph permalink
    February 12, 2011

    @Dan .. I understand …. but NASL can only stay strong if every club can sustain a long tern commitment, not a partial one (one year sanction)………Just like Government rules & regulation into people lives stymy growth or business …. USSF criteria for Div-2 is undermining the growth of the game because the only club that could meet that criteria is MLS owners ..

  33. Outside Observer permalink
    February 12, 2011

    I completely agree with Chris on the reasons for abstaining. I believe Garber did the right thing by not letting his vested interest in Montreal get in the way of a sound decision. As for Gulati, without a tie, there was no need.

    @George

    The structure of the NASL is slightly different than that of the MLS. In the early days of the MLS, you could have one owner for multiple teams (even though it isn’t ideal). Each player signs a contract with the league. Not the team. So the Hunt family didn’t own one player contract of any player on their teams, that was the domain of the MLS. Transferring players between teams didn’t include a transfer fee, and must have been approved by the league. Now in the NASL, each player actually signs with the entity that owns each team, i.e. FC Tampa Bay LLC (or whatever the ‘companies’ may be named.
    Having one owner for multiple companies creates a competitive, and monopolistic advantage. Theoretically, Traffic could discount every decent player on the Railhawks and Silverbacks so they could offload them to Miami (for nothing) and create a juggernaut. Now whether they have intentions of that or not is beside the point, and in MLS’ case, this didn’t happen because the league wanted to keep their competitive balance. For the league to function properly in the long run, at least without being set up as a single-entity structure, it is in it’s best interest to make sure that there is only one owner per team.

  34. marco permalink
    February 12, 2011

    Let us not forget Mr. Gulati works for the New England Revolution, thus how could he and Mr.Garber vote since they are paid by a competitive league

    http://www.revolutionsoccer.net/club/bios/sunil-gulati

    @Daniel Feuerstein ;; Great deduction with Arthur Blank in Atlanta, why doesn’t every city call up the area NFL or NHL owner and say buy a piece of my team. get a grip

  35. Bart permalink
    February 12, 2011

    Well, well, I am a little late to the game. Provisional sanctioning, huh? I guess this means we all get to argue about this all over again at the end of the season.

    Unfortunately, USSF did not choose to end this debacle one way or another, so the uncertainty will kill long term sponsorship prospects for another year.

    Congrats to those of you in the NASL markets, you get to see live soccer for another year!

  36. Steve permalink
    February 12, 2011

    For what it’s worth, through Twitter I’m seeing that the president of the Islanders confirmed ratification went through today.

    Of course, the tweets are in Spanish, and we here in Tampa had a toast when we learned of the 6-5 vote early this morning, so the whiskey and my horrible language skills may be defying me here.

  37. jw7 permalink
    February 12, 2011

    :)

    nuff said!

  38. Dan permalink
    February 12, 2011

    Yes Bart, Let the squabbling continue lol jk

  39. Orange Trooper permalink
    February 12, 2011

    Puerto Rico is so gonna whip you’all up!

    Que pajo!!!

  40. jspech permalink
    February 12, 2011

    I listed to that Soccer Sam show for the 1st time. Their American only rant was offensive. Won’t listen again. Soccer at every level in the USA have forgein players so I could not understand the rant. There was an interesting caller (I think the 1st caller) that kind of showed them to be foolish. The IMS writer was brilliant with the Bud ownership comment.

  41. Daniel Feuerstein permalink
    February 13, 2011

    @Marco When Arthur Blank was interested in bringing MLS To Atlanta obviously he had the Georgia Dome in mind to host his supposed MLS Expansion side and not actually taking a look at the local side that’s been around for a while, that would be the Silverbacks. Since MLS has decided not to go into Atlanta Mr. Blank has decided to give it up. But

    If Mr. Blank who owns the Atlanta Falcons wants to be a part owner of the Silverbacks and helps them out, then those drawings to add more sections to Silverbacks Park can probably happen. If you get one of the top sports owners in Atlanta or if you can find another wealthy Atlantian to help out then that’s fine too. But the point is this, if Mr. Blank still wants to do something with soccer in the Metro Atlanta area, his best bet would be to partner with the Silverbacks and help them grow some more. A gorilla & dirty bird partnership is not a bad idea.

  42. thesuperrookie permalink
    February 13, 2011

    I need clarification on two things:

    1) Why are NASL teams not automatically qualified for the US Open Cup as they are Div. 2?
    2) Why must Traffic divest itself from Atlanta and Carolina?

  43. El Padre permalink
    February 13, 2011

    @Steph, your basic presuppostions that the USSF want a strong Division 2 and that the NASL would settle for merely Division 2 status forever are the reasons why you are having trouble with this issue. The NASL began as the TOA (Team Owners Association) composed of a few owners of the old USL1 & 2. They had as a vision where eventually they would develop a league that could rival the MLS. USL very clearly stated in 2008 that this is not their goal. Your historical comparisons of the mergers which formed the modern NBA, NHL & NFL are good ones but the interest of the NASL in such a scenario would be an eventual merger of MLS with the NASL to form a 40+ team Division 1 for the US, Canada, and the Caribbean. Gulati and Garber both have a vested interest in this plan not working (Can you say $40 million franchise fees to enter the MLS?). It is also, in part, for this reason that they abstained.
    As Brian, via IMS, brilliantly reported last year, there is a legal precedent in the US courts which limits the USSF’s authority in the BUSINESS of soccer in the US. It is not a legal monopoly like MLB. Therefore, since things were not clarified until after much money was spent and contracts were signed for 2011, the USSF was under a massive legal threat from the NASL and its owners if they were perceived to be interfering with the free commerce of Professional Soccer in the US. I don’t think Gulati & Garber wanted to be seen as agents in the demise of the NASL and be named in any future legal action resulting from their negative votes.
    The NASL has big dreams and the establishment in US Soccer is afraid of how that will change the status quo.

  44. jw7 permalink
    February 13, 2011

    @rook,
    2. Because those were the new regulations they (NASL and USL) all agreed to last year.

    @El Padre… ?? When did NASL say there “vision” would rival MLS?
    Your history of USL’s comments before 2008 might need a little more study before you try painting them as a group who never wanted to compete against MLS.

  45. El Padre permalink
    February 13, 2011

    @jw7 I guess my personal conversation with Francisco Marcos on the subject doesn’t count in your mind. However, he laments the fact that he let those who would become the TOA entertain ideas of such competition prior to 2008. He thinks that their hopes to compete with the MLS is pure folly. Besides, if you’ve been following this as closely as I have for the last two years, you would have read these things too. I’m pretty sure it has all appeared right here in IMS- unless I’m mistaken. But it doesn’t matter, I’ve heard it with my own ears from from the man at the center of the entire issue. So, if you’ve not heard it nor read it before, now you have.
    Prior to 2008, Vancouver, Portland, and Montreal were the leading proponents of the plan to compete with MLS. According to Mr. Marcos, the MLS pulled off the greatest coup by simultaneously silencing their competition and getting them to pay millions of dollars for the privilege joining them. Well done, I’d say. Anyway, that is why I very carefully chose my words and placed 2008 as the turning point.
    jw7, my suggestion in the future in order to keep discourse civil, that you not make ad hominum attacks, and if you wanted to know my sources or a clarification about what I said you ask in a more respectful manner. Brevity, in mass media, isn’t always the most effective way to discuss an issue as complex as this one. In all things charity.

  46. El Padre permalink
    February 13, 2011

    BTW as far as NASL teams not playing in the Open Cup, there is no rhyme or reason for this. As a friend recently said, “You can’t be half pregnant.” They are either recognized US team’s or they are not. Last year, they all competed. This is a novelty from out of nowhere. It seems petty & vindictive to me. I know of no precedent for this.

    @jw7 May I ask your source for your statement about an agreement between the NASL, USL & USSF concerning this? (See how pleasantly one can phrase such an inquiry.)

  47. February 13, 2011

    El Padre, I will get clarification on this at the presser on Monday but from what I’m hearing it had to do with the US Open Cup Committee getting tired of waiting for the whole NASL thing to end and felt they needed to move forward on creating the US Open Cup schedule and therefore went ahead with things. This was done after the USSF had rescinded the provisional sanctioning.

  48. El Padre permalink
    February 13, 2011

    Thanks, Brian. You are the man!

  49. Strikers Return permalink
    February 13, 2011

    @BQ – Thanks for the great reporting. As always IMS is the first place to go for pro soccer news! Now that the sanctioning is in the bag, any details you can get on the USOC status of NASL would be as appreciated as always!!!

  50. Steph permalink
    February 13, 2011

    @El Padre … I am having no problem with the issue of Div-2 ….. USSF members (with MLS clubs) are NFL owners who are more into to the game for business purpose than the love of the game ….. Let me perfectly – I am in favor of Div-2 league …..I just don’t think the standard set by USSF for Div2 clubs to meet is an endurance to the growth of the league …… the only people (again) that could meet that criteria is MLS clubs …… MLS owners are business man and NFL owners ….they are in these for money … …(40 Millions dollars fee for expansion team …. Please) ..

  51. February 13, 2011

    Steph…I’m curious…what happened to commas…periods…and…paragrpahs…we’re not text messaging here…or are we… ;)

  52. RedCard permalink
    February 13, 2011

    @ El Padre true down to the very last world.

    I could see this as if it was black and white. Blaming USSF or MLS is not the answer it not them total could bring your down. I believe ever one in here has a good point but fell to see the real obstacle that lye in your path. MLS took the three highest attendance makers in the NASL the attendance is slowly dropping the highest attendance right now is FC Tampa Bay with 4,594 attendance average and now with MLS thinking about going up to 24 teams it has it sights on places like Miami, Atlanta, Minneapolis–St. Paul, San Diego, St. Louis, Tampa-St. Petersburg , Baltimore, and ]New York some. Cities that has already NASL franchises in them or are Soccer friendly city which make if tuff to build a league around none soccer friendly cities and taking the teams they have already built. Even if traffic fines three investors to take over those three teams and find other teams or people join has expansion teams the attendance numbers are not in their favor and numbers rarely lie they have to get higher attendance or more teams. No butt in the seats no money. These are all fact and can be found on the internet to me these are facts

  53. RedCard permalink
    February 13, 2011

    now my personal
    Thoughts are I think the MLS know what they are doing they they now they have to get ride of the NASL and they are a threat cause they don’t want to stay a D2 forever even though I think they should and not make ripple as a MLS fan I don’t trust traffic. I don’t know how this is going to end but I hopefully the NALS would merge with the MLS an when we can have piece at last.
    Congrads of getting D2 sanctioning.

  54. February 13, 2011

    We barely get sanctioned and now we are strong enough to storm MLS with pitchforks and torches? I sometimes have really weird nightmares, but that is quite the hallucination. Division II might get fully sanctioned next year if they work hard to find owners, partners, advertisers, fans, and hot girls to buy me beer. They could start by getting a new website, and they could hire someone more qualified then Helen Keller to it this time too. To be very honest, they have more work then I think they can accomplish before the season starts. Now where is my beer, and it better not be that yank swill PBR!

  55. jw7 permalink
    February 14, 2011

    @El Padre, “Besides, if you’ve been following this as closely as I have for the last two years…”

  56. Not a fan permalink
    February 14, 2011

    NASL and Aaron Davidson are a joke.

  57. RedCard permalink
    February 14, 2011

    @Not a fan You

    I not a not a big fan either but I don’t wish them ill either. You have to give it to the NASL they never quite I do admirer that. Dislike them if you want but as long as the can keep the wheel roiling they will be around for a little while more.

    As the NASL fans would say “believe ” right!!!

  58. yankiboy permalink
    February 17, 2011

    @Not a fan: Your posts are a BIGGER joke.

  59. yankiboy permalink
    February 17, 2011

    @RedCard: No disrespect to you my friend but I don’t think that MLS is worried about Traffic in any way and they sure don’t think of Traffic as a threat. MLS has already taken all of the second division markets that it wanted. Just like promotion/relegation won’t in the US/Canada/Australia and some other places (yeah, I went there, again), the NASL will not be merging with MLS.

    It’s all about the economics; They just don’t work for the market.

Comments are closed.

css.php