Skip to content

NASL Podcast Episode #45; The Proposed NASL Split Season for 2013

2012 September 11
by Brian Quarstad

Welcome to special edition of the IMSoccer News North American Soccer League Podcast.  In episode #45, we briefly discuss this past weeks matches. Then we get into a very thorough discussion of the hot topic in the NASL, the proposed split season for 2013. This week Jay (Yankiboy) Long, and yours truly, Brian Quarstad, talk to special guests Pieter Brown, Neil Morris and Steven Sandor about this very hot topic.

You can find all past episodes of the North American Soccer League Podcast here and the RSS Feed here.

[buzzsprout episode=’59084′ player=’true’]

The Ultras Alive podcast with Pieter Brown can be found here.

Steven Sandor’s The can be found here.

Neil Morris and David Fellerath’s article referenced in the podcast and a must read, can be found here.

12 Responses
  1. September 11, 2012

    Please note, in Steven Sandor’s segment he is talking about the cost of travel for a playoff game and his audio cuts out right when he says how much it can cost for one match away. I tried to doctor it up but it’s still basically inaudible and no, this was not the NASL infiltrating the IMSoccer News podcast and doing a Nixon tapes splice. It was just a fall off from Skype and the amount Steven states is $20 thousand.

  2. Fotbalist permalink
    September 12, 2012

    Excellent podcast!

  3. Steven Sandor permalink
    September 12, 2012

    One thing I forgot to mention is that, with the new schedule, we won’t see any more double dips in Puerto Rico. Because of the distance, many owners want to play both PR road games in one trip (FC Edmonton did this in 2011). That is, fly out, play Wednesday, play Sat./Sun., then go home. Cuts flying costs in half. But, now having to play in PR in the first half and then again in the second half, teams are ensured max costs to go to the Caribbean.

  4. Jay Long permalink
    September 12, 2012

    ^And the Man keeps on tossing out nuggets of knowledge!!! That is another seriously sick point that I was sleeping on.

  5. bullsear permalink
    September 13, 2012

    Anyone know what Mark Andersen from the Strikers said to the question of whether he’d rather play in the humidity or the cold?

  6. September 13, 2012

    Yup, and you can listen to it yourself right here.

    To me, that wasn’t the question that needed to be asked because it’s not about playing in the cold. It’s about the condition and therefore availability of playing fields at the two ends of the season. The other question that should also be asked is wheather folks from MN and Edmonton really will sit through a match in mid-April when it’s likely to be windy, raining and 45°F. To me those are the real questions.

  7. bullsear permalink
    September 13, 2012

    Thanks BQ. And for the record, I agree with you on all counts. I’m not sure how a Minnesota team can be expected to compete, when all the Southern teams have the opportunity to play multiple warm-up matches outdoors.

  8. CoconutMonkey permalink
    September 13, 2012

    Good stuff, guys.

    Kudos to David for the cool info too.

  9. Jared permalink
    September 14, 2012

    As soon as the league announced the new format, I was looking forward to your discussion on it. You guys certainly didn’t disappoint. This was one of the best podcasts you guys have done. Great questions and very informative answers from your guests.

    I don’t think there’s a league format that will be 100% fair to all teams, apart from a simple round-robin, single table, team with the most points is champion format. But just remember that while northern teams may have to start the season on the road, by the end of the season, when players and teams are worn down from games and travel, they would also get more games at home. Now getting fans to those games in the cold is another matter.

  10. September 14, 2012

    Thanks everyone for the comments. Great guests created a great podcast. Jay and I were just along for the ride.

  11. Steven Sandor permalink
    September 17, 2012

    Edmonton fans are a pretty resilient bunch. In fact, it only becomes a question of it being “too cold” for an outdoor match if it gets into 0 C territorty (32 for my American friends!) To an Albertan, 45 is a fine, acceptable temperature. It’s what we are used to. We played the RailHawks in 55 F last week, didn’t affect attendance.

    If the game is meaningful, no temp is too cold. Heritage Classic in Edmonton was ridiculously cold, less than -20 C (That’s below zero on the F scale as well) and it didn’t affect attendance.

    To me, this is the case why Soccer Bowl hosting rights has GOT to go to best overall record. Imagine PR wins 1st half, Edmonton wins second… How big will the last games be for PR, to ensure home field? It’s either Edmonton in the winter or the heat and humidity of PR. It’s a huge difference.

  12. Jay Long permalink
    September 18, 2012

    ^Steve and others are already well aware of this nut just in case some of us haven’t realized it quite yet:

    The problem with Steve’s proposal of awarding the championship match to the club with the best overall record is that that, while just–it will leave the league’s partners and potential partners with the same problem–only a week or two notice to make travel and other logisitical arrangements.


Comments are closed.