Changes coming to Major League Soccer in 2012 - Part 2 The Playoffs
by denz on Dec 22, 2011 8:59 AM MST
Email
PrintWell we looked at the change to MLS Cup in Part 1 of this series and now we move to the playoffs, which will have a couple of changes, two that I really like and 1 that well seems a bit of a stretch. Here are the changes that MLS announced:
- 10 clubs will qualify for the MLS Cup Playoffs – the top five in points from each conference at the end of the regular season.
- The 4th- and 5th- place teams will play a single knockout game, the winner of which will advance to the Conference Semifinals and face the 1st-place team in the conference.
- The Conference Semifinals will be decided by a two-game, aggregate-goal format (same as 2011).
- The Conference Championships will be decided by a two-game, aggregate-goal format (change from recent years).
So let's start with the changes that I like, first up there is no more moving of teams between conferences. Now it might seem strange that I would like this change but with all the other changes being made this one seems rather logical. If you are going to have conferences, why would you move teams to other conferences in the playoffs? Of course I don't consider it perfect because I would rather just see the best teams make the playoffs and not worry about conferences at all, but "this is North America and we have to do things differently here, besides all the other sports have conferences".
Oh how I love when MLS uses this answer anytime they have a change that flies in face of what most consider to be the norm of the soccer world. Conversely, have you ever noticed that in addition to that "explanation" that MLS has one other they use when they defend not changing something "well we want to protect the integrity of the sport". I will leave it at that, as this is a topic for another day.
After the jump, a further look at the playoff changes:
So I do think the decision to stay with 10 teams "making" the playoffs is silly, I think having over 50% of the league in the playoffs is too much. I would be perfectly fine if we just let the top 4 teams in each conference play in the playoffs and get rid of this wildcard thing as quickly as possible. Now a big part of the reason why I don't like the whole wildcard thing is perhaps the biggest change to the playoff system (and one I like a lot), now the Conference Final will be a two game series just like the Conference Semifinal.
It is the addition of one more match to the playoffs that makes me believe that adding the extra match to the Conference final, while keeping the wildcard match would be counter to what MLS stated about not going to a longer season to keep a balanced schedule, that being they want players to be able to perform at their highest level at the end of the season. With the crunched timeline of the playoffs, caused by FIFA dates the week before MLS Cup for at least the next 3 years, doesn't having a wildcard match seem excessive?
The addition of a second leg to the Conference Final means that the team that hosts MLS Cup will have been able to play 3 playoff matches in front of their home fans. That is something that I thin all of us can support.
Overall the changes to the playoffs, including the change to MLS Cup are ones that I can support and overall I think they will make the MLS post season a more enjoyable one for the fans.
OFF MY SOAPBOX
13 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Finally...
Since it’s Christmas let me just say, “Hallelujia!” Finally the league figures out that the one match “conference final” was a mistake. MLS remains a very regional sport and not having home matches for teams in the semi-finals (sorry, I mean “conference finals”) was a huge mistake.
In my opinion the MLS Cup final should also be a two match series.
Not so quick
I like having a single final, like the FA Cup, UEFA Champions League, and other tournaments. I actually am really starting to like a modified version of the Brian Straus, playoff groups format, but more on that later.
Not exactly
this is North America and we have to do things differently here
Try this is North America and things are different here. With the league spread out across an entire continent, it’s a huge travel burden on teams to follow a balanced schedule. The schedule changes for 2012 (likely to be complained about in part 3 or 4 of your series) abandon the balanced schedule in favor of more games against less remote opponents (not necessarily rivals). Less travel will have a positive effect on the fatigue level of the players and therefore the quality of play on the field. It just means RSL fans (and Seattle fans) will only get to see Henry once every other year. Boo hoo.
Overall I too am very pleased with the changes to the schedule and the playoffs. We can finally abandon the balanced schedule which was never going to work in the long run (as we expand beyond 20 teams) and only served as a catalyst for complaining about the conference system of qualifying for the playoffs. With the new changes, the overall system is much cleaner and leaves much less room for complaints or perceived unfairness. This blog may get much quieter if that indeed is true.
But why then
do they use the other side of that coin when it is convenient to what ever decision they have made, they got rid of the PK shoot out (thank god) because they wanted to be like real soccer leagues, and each time they make a decision that fans don’t like or question the legitimacy of they pull one of two cards out as their justification. I would be much happier if they just would say, this is the decision we have made because we think it is best, stop using excuses.
When I get to the whole unbalanced schedule thing, you are right I am not a fan of it. Please the fatigue factor, then why add another playoff game this year and another one next year, why not go back to 32 matches a year. Travel costs and time, easy to deal with if they would just do road trips (yes I know it isn’t as easy as some thing, but it isn’t as difficult as others think either). Why not then say we will only expand to cities with major airlines hubs, so everyone can do direct flights? Or allow teams to use direct charter flights, there are plenty of things they could do.
How is each team playing a schedule different than every other team, going to be cleaner and have more “perceived” fairness? Come on really, do you believe that this:
Western Conference – 24 in-conference + 10 out-of-conference games:
· Western Conference clubs will play each West opponent 3 times (24 games):
o West clubs will play 4 conference opponents twice at home and once away
o They will play the other 4 conference opponents once at home and twice away.
o The home and away games will be reversed in 2013.
· Western Conference clubs will play each East opponent once each (10 games):
o 5 of these will be at home and 5 will be away.
o The East opponents each team faces at home and away will be reversed in 2013.
Eastern Conference – 25 in-conference + 9 out-of-conference games:
· Eastern Conference clubs will play 25 games against other East clubs:
o East teams will play 7 conference opponents three times each (21 games) and
o 2 conference opponents twice each (4 games).
· Eastern Conference clubs will play each West opponent once each (9 games):
o Some will play 4 at home and 5 away while others will play 5 at home and 4 away.
o The West opponents each team faces at home and away will be reversed in 2013.
Is easier than playing each other team twice a year, once a home and once away. Really to a soccer fan you are going to say that the new is cleaner, fairer and will draw fewer complaints? Come one your kidding right.
I doubt MLS will go beyond 20 teams, first because FIFA doesn’t encourage it, second because we have many markets that are losing money still and while the attraction may be that we can go to 24, 28, or more teams, it would be a move similar to what has caused so many issues for indoor football over the last few years. MLS owners aren’t generally NFL, MLB, or even NHL and NBA owners, most of them aren’t close to that type of money (yes there are some who are, but not most) and even some of the ones who are (Krafts, Hunts, Kroenke) appear unwilling to spend the money needed to fund their teams. I think it is more likely that we get NY2 as the Don wants, then you see several teams either relocate or be sold and relocated.
Perhaps if MLS is worried about player fatigue they should eliminate things like friendlies, post or preseason out of country trips, the MLS All Star game. Maybe they should eliminate the playoffs all together so they don’t compete with tournaments like the US Open Cup or Champions League? Again I didn’t think that LA or Seattle looked overly fatigued in November as compared to August, did you?
I think for MLS to grow and reach out to soccer fans the closer that they can stay to the traditions of the sport the better off it is, I think the more they try to become the NFL, the less attractive the league becomes to those who are fans of the sport more than the league. Just my opinion.
Replies
Regarding the duplicity you’re claiming MLS applies “conveniently” to various situations, you need to look a little deeper. If you pay attention to the context of the cases where they explain that “North America is different” vs. those when they explain that they’re trying to be true to the game or FIFA, you might not complain so much. When it comes to the product on the field, they started off in the weeds a little bit with count up clocks, PKs to decide all ties (as you mention), and several other Americanisms which they’ve slowly done away with in favor of keeping the game/rules/flow true to the game that’s been played world wide for 100+ years. These “on the field” items represent the vast majority of the times in recent years where we’ve heard MLS say they’re staying true to the game or staying in line with FIFA demands. The other primary context is around items that are meta to the game itself, stuff like scheduling and playoffs. In these meta contexts, they appear to be much more willing to not do their own thing or in a way that they think best fits our unique geographic or demographic characteristics. As you point out, this is much to the chagrin of fans that are obsessed with making everything identical to our English counterparts.
I doubt MLS will go beyond 20 teams, first because FIFA doesn’t encourage it
It’s ironic that you’re now citing what FIFA recommends while at the same time damning MLS for making similar citations (though they’ve never made this one). I think they most certainly will go beyond 20 teams within the next 5 years. We all know they’re already working hard on NY2. It’s also been stated many times that David Beckham had a clause in his original 4 year contract that he would have an ownership opportunity in an expansion team after he left the league (or possibly retired from the sport). That’s 2 teams which will very likely become reality soon, regardless of FIFA’s recommendations.
So what then with the balanced schedule? 40 regular season games? Really?! Look, the balanced schedule has to end some time. They’ve been warning about it since 2010 when they first had the opportunity to have a balanced schedule. In 2011 they added 4 more games to the schedule almost as a gift to the obsessive fans who think scheduling must be as it is in Europe. Perhaps that was their first mistake. Maybe the balanced schedule should have lived only 1 season so as not to lead all of these crazies along for another year.
How is each team playing a schedule different than every other team, going to be cleaner
That’s not what I was referring to when I said it would be cleaner. I was referring to the topic of your post, the new playoff system, and more specifically to the conference playoff system. Since we no longer have a balanced schedule (or as you put it every team playing a different schedule) there is no longer pressure to let wild card teams cross over. This has been a subject of ridicule and complaining by MLS fans (the Eurosnobs as well as the regular ones) because we’ve had multiple cases where the European championship game was contested by 1 or even 2 Western conference teams. This new playoff system, in connection with the newly unbalanced schedule, becomes a lot cleaner with no cross over weirdness.
I didn’t think that LA or Seattle looked overly fatigued in November as compared to August, did you?
Yes I did, which made both of their success even more impressive. LA didn’t suffer the injuries that Seattle did, so they managed to win MLS Cup.
I think for MLS to grow and reach out to soccer fans the closer that they can stay to the traditions of the sport the better off it is
I think staying true to the sport itself (the rules of the game and how it’s implemented on the field) and respecting international soccer dates and call-ups are super important and I think they’ve done a good job prioritizing those things. I think that scheduling and playoffs they can do however they think is best for our unique conditions and markets and I don’t really care what the Europhiles think.
Or allow teams to use direct charter flights
You were singing a different tune when you said “”http://www.rslsoapbox.com/2011/9/19/2429394/major-league-soccer-isnt-perfect-but-not-sure-what-grant-whal-is#78000492" >Charter flights are limited so rich teams don’t have an advantage over other teams, oh god no not a fair playing ground."
Corrections
I had an errant “not” in my first paragraph: …they appear to be much more willing to not do their own thing… Sorry for not proofreading better.
Your site also ade my link, so here it is again to your comment where you contradicted your current sentiment about charter flights. You can’t have it both ways (but that won’t stop the demands or complaints, will it).
Really
So the fact that the top 3 teams in MLS were teams that played and traveled as much or more than any other team, LA, Seattle and RSL all competed in Champions League, US Open Cup in addition to MLS, and yet they had 3 great seasons despite injuries, despite the salary cap, despite the travel, they still at the end of it all the 3 best teams in the league.
My whole point is that MLS seems to be an organization that lives off two minds, when they want it to be convenient they use the “soccer tradition” model, it was used when they got rid of the PK shootout, when pressed about adding more officials, or technology to better officiate matches, but when they want to run away from soccer traditions, they pull out the “this is the US, and now because of multiple teams in Canada, the this is North America” line. You talk about me wanting things both ways, it is because I have to respond to a league that flip flops their who identity on an almost annual basis. It is because despite fans (be their MLS fans, Eurosnobs, or just soccer fans) who would love things like a single table, the league continues to run towards the NFL model, which is great for the NFL but flies in the face of most of the things soccer fans love about soccer.
Unique conditions, really, so MLS is playing in 4 time zones, the impact of that can easily be mitigated by proper planning. I don’t hear teams from Spain complain when they have to travel for the Club World Cup, or for Champions League matches, geography isn’t an issue unique to North America. Heck some sports have teams playing in cities across time zones on back to back days. Please, it is an easy excuse to not do things the right way.
Good point on charter flights but you miss my point, in the first case we were talking about the 2011 season and why MLS has a limit on charter flights. I stick by my point, they limited them to prevent any team from getting an unfair advantage over the other. It really isn’t any different than saying if travel is their number one issue that prevents them from keeping a sane schedule, then why not have every team travel via charter. There would be no unfair advantage if every team did it, and if travel alone is a major factor on making the changes they did to the schedule, it would be a more positive step towards correcting it as opposed to creating a schedule that looks like a total cluster f.
Yes really
I know it’s inconvenient for you to recognized the contexts in which MLS employs these excuses, but it doesn’t make your points magically valid by ignoring this fact.
Your Spain example is not valid. It’s a one-off. We’re talking about yearly scheduling of a 19 team league. Apples to apples please.
On the point of charter flights, your assuming that MLS would foot the bill for them all. What if, instead, they just lifted the limit on charter flights and let the teams pay for them if they wanted to? You’d throw a fit on that, wouldn’t you.
One off?
Didn’t UK teams have to travel to Russia? Don’t teams from Germany have to travel to Spain for Europa or Champions League? Yes if you count just inter-league travel, sure teams in the UK travel less than the US, but if you count all the matches the top teams play in well then that gap closes and the point loses some validity.
If you want apples to apples, how many other top level national leagues in FIFA nations don’t play a balanced schedule. While their calendar may be different, even in nations with fewer than 20 teams and split seasons they play a balanced schedule. Russia has teams in 3 different time zones and yet have a balanced schedule.
As long as the league has rules I expect they should be followed, this is a single entity league. Once that changes and each team is responsible for their own team, I would be fine with lifting any limits on charter flights. However MLS currently pays for travel, so if they were to choose to go with charter flights to save on travel time and fatigue issues, yes I would expect they should do so for all teams.
If you want to discuss the advantages and disadvantages of the MLS structure, happy to do so. Do I think any one team should be allowed to violate the league rules just because they can afford to, no I don’t it defeats the purpose of having rules doesn’t it?
So, connecting the dots
You’re in favor of preserving the balanced schedule and they way they can do this and cut down on travel fatigue is if they carter all of the flights for all of the teams. This is okay with you because MLS will just foot the bill and pay for all the charter flights for each team. You realize that’s not how it works (even in this single entitity system). Each team is responsible for paying for their own travel. The gargantuan cost of charter flights for all of the teams for all of the games all season long is not something the league could (or would) bear.
So connecting the dots, a stated reason why a balanced schedule is not possible is because of travel fatigue. You propose that this could be remedied by streamlining travle with charter flights. This increase in travel cost cannot be borne by the league. Therefore, the league’s “excuse” of travel fatigue being a reason for the unbalanced schedule is indeed valid and your proposed solution is faulty.
how many other top level national leagues in FIFA nations don’t play a balanced schedule
Mexico, Argentina, and Colombia. That’s just off the top of my head. I know there are many others.
Hmm
Columbia, plays every team in their league once and then has one more match, closer to balanced than what MLS is going to. Argentina plays two ’seasons" in which they play each other team once, a balanced schedule. In Mexico they play each other team once, again balanced.
So much for the list off the top of your head, each plays a balanced schedule of playing each other team once, and one adds one additional match. None of them play some teams 3 times while playing other teams only once.
Also the league does pay for travel, that was a huge part of the question when RSL had to travel twice to Vancouver was would the league foot the bill the second time. I didn’t say charter flights were the solution to the travel issues MLS faces, I said they could be part of the solution. The easiest way to solve travel issues is simple, plan better, leverage road trips for multiple matches and reduce costs and travel. My issue with the new schedule is that it simply sacrifices simplicity in favor of reinforcing the leagues desire to make their conferences mean more than they do, it is about them embracing the model of the NFL over the models of soccer around the world.
Heck I would be fine if the MLS went to split seasons, like Mexico, Columbia, or Argentina and played each other team once each part of the split season. I realize that the reality of player travel causing potential fatigue issues is real, I also realize that solving it with this bizarre schedule will likely leave fans confused by the new system, it will alienate soccer fans who already believe MLS is too different for them to have interested.
If you find a league out there where teams will play 1/2 the teams in the league 3 or 4 times a year, while only playing the other 1/2 of the league once a year, please let me know. However your examples of leagues who have split seasons where they face each other team once, simply don’t come close to comparing to what MLS is going to do. I am simply amazed that you really think that this new system is in any way better or even acceptable as a soccer fan.
Just answering your question
Your question insinuated that there were no such leagues. You were wrong. If you want to explain away the answer, that’s fine, it doesn’t change the fact that there are other leagues that have unbalanced schedules. If all you’re going to do when I provide answers is change the question, then you’re just being antagonistic.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on RSL Soapbox
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
