The time zone requirement is truly idiotic. The sport would be better served to just drop that one thing, and let a couple of competitive regional D3 leagues pop up
As far as I can tell from reading the PLS there is no time zone standard for D3. The D1 requirement reads:
U.S.-based teams must be located in at least the Eastern, Central and Pacific time
zones in the continental United States. (These three time zones are required
because the majority of the large population centers are located in these time
zones.)
And the D2 requirement reads:
In the first year, U.S.-based teams must be located in at least two different time
zones in the continental United States. By year six, U.S.-based teams must be
located in at least the Eastern, Central and Pacific time zones. (These three time
zones are required because the majority of the large population centers are located
in these time zones.)
This is for the men's side. The women have different requirements. Either way the time zone requirement is still silly and should be done away with. Same with market size requirements.
Looking at current PLS, I've been under the wrong impression. I don't know why nobody has done East Coast and West Coast D3 leagues and called it a day.
I know in one of the lower league discords I'm in, any time a complaint about the D3 travel is levied, a conversation about how a few investors could prop up a D3 league in SoCal and focus it heavily into the Latino community is brought up. The issue is that in the US, the crown of "National Champion" will almost always prevail over logic. That's why "D4" leagues like NPSL, TLFC, and USL2 all have a national championship when just having 4-8 regional or conference champs should do. It's a reason why arena football is so messy. While setting up local, or regional, D3 leagues with between 8-16 teams would be smart, that would require people to be okay with not being a "National Champion." Which too many rich, egotistical people just aren't okay with.
I believe that. You'd like to think that they could get their heads around developing and selling players, and bragging about the fees they can get. Instead of "I flushed a TON of money down the toilet to fly my Cali team across the country, but I have a shiny trophy"
Can't imagine there's very many direct flights from Spokane, WA to Sherman, TX, or Statesboro, GA, or Mount Vernon, NY, or etc. etc. Which means they likely have to fly to a larger city, and bus in. A whole bunch of extra cost all for the chance to maybe win.
Ego. That's always the issue isn't it. Looking at everyone's favorite pyramid, England, you have leagues in different regions. For instance, a club I follow that is in London was just promoted to Level 9. Their regional league is all that matters for the most part. However, they do have a national tournament for their level, The FA Vase. Based on what level a club is at, it goes FA Cup > FA Trophy > FA Vase. USSF could create national cups that could fill this role.
"Potentially raising the D3 men’s PLS standards to match current USL L1 standards is in the cards. The light requirements for the PLS at the D3 level is how NISA skated by with provisional sanctioning for five years."
This portion is likely focused at mandating that any proper D3 pro clubs must have control or ownership of their own soccer specific stadium (SSS), the lack of which has undone too many lower league clubs to remember as well as fueling destructive SoccerWarz! However, the D3 PLS standards for the SSS will likely be 5000 seats. In other words, the current norm for USL League One!
Another interesting point is that the MLS doesn't seem to be involved in these discussions between US Soccer and the USL? I wonder what will happen to MLSNP with the revised PLS? AFAIK, many of the current MLSNP don't have their own SSS or piggyback on MLS first team facilities? Will a PLS waiver be granted to those MLSNP clubs or this will kill off most of the few remaining MLSNP independents?
I think one of the key things is MLS has its own standards now which are significantly higher than the USF one standard so they probably don’t need to be involved in any discussions, but we have to remember that this will go at some point in front of the pro league council which Don Garber effectively runs
The ultimate fate of MLSNP is fascinating as so many aspects of the MLSNP ecosystem is hidden or obscure. It's own regulatory framework is hidden, beyond sanctioning provided by US Soccer. Specifically, there are no CBA for MLSNP players, AFAIK no requirements regulating "owners" for the few MLSNP independents, fan attendance at MLSNP matches are difficult to impossible to determine, etc. But it sounds like the MLSNP is not mentioned at all, in the conversations you are hearing?
I would think the ownership standards would be the focus, as much or more than stadiums. Playing in high school football stadiums is unsightly, but the most egregious thing is not paying rent, referees, and players.
Agreed! However, ownership standards may be more difficult to police, since money is fungible and money trails can be buried under mountains of paperwork or difficult to audit. A primary owner may also suffer sudden financial reversal. In contrast, the SSS or lack thereof is irrefutable and tends to be more durable....
I had always understood the "enclosed" requirement for stadiums to mean that the team must be able to control the entrance and exit of people (i.e. a stadium is required to have fencing all around it so people couldn't just walk up. You can't play in an open park). It never really seemed to be that big of an issue, so I'm surprised it's up for discussion.
Getting the stadium requirement down to 10,000 would be optimal to make pro/rel work. A 15,000 seat stadium seems like just to much of a lift for smaller teams and teams who could find themselves in League One.
I don't know if I really like seeing the D3 standards raised unless they are going to begin sanctioning a D4 pro league. There really needs to be a space for creativity and less well financed clubs to be able to attempt going pro with less risk. The problem is the antics of the NISA is poisoning that well.
The time zone requirement is silly and should be totally done away with but if USSF is so set on it they should at least loosen it up. D1 3 of 4 time zones (East, Central, Mountain, West). D2 2 of 4. At least currently as far as I can tell there is no time zone requirement for D3 so that would remain. That way as you go up the pyramid you have more of a national footprint that the federation seems so set on without as much travel burden at the lower levels.
Either way, thank you Kartik for the reporting and the discussion. Can't wait to hear more from you on this front.
yeah, and as I said in the piece Chris, I did not even know that there were such a requirement I started talking to people. It seems like it’s something pretty standard as you said, but perhaps it’s also up for misinterpretation which is why they are talking about getting rid of it?
Yeah, probably just a misunderstanding. Either way an interesting wrinkle, if I remember correctly, at one point "enclosed" stadium was one of the issues NPSL had with Tulsa Athletic at Hicks Park.
I believe that "enclosed" has generally meant covered/shaded seating (I've read that somewhere previously). Controlled ingress/egress is actually covered separately as something that's applicable for all leagues.
The time zone requirement is truly idiotic. The sport would be better served to just drop that one thing, and let a couple of competitive regional D3 leagues pop up
As far as I can tell from reading the PLS there is no time zone standard for D3. The D1 requirement reads:
U.S.-based teams must be located in at least the Eastern, Central and Pacific time
zones in the continental United States. (These three time zones are required
because the majority of the large population centers are located in these time
zones.)
And the D2 requirement reads:
In the first year, U.S.-based teams must be located in at least two different time
zones in the continental United States. By year six, U.S.-based teams must be
located in at least the Eastern, Central and Pacific time zones. (These three time
zones are required because the majority of the large population centers are located
in these time zones.)
This is for the men's side. The women have different requirements. Either way the time zone requirement is still silly and should be done away with. Same with market size requirements.
Looking at current PLS, I've been under the wrong impression. I don't know why nobody has done East Coast and West Coast D3 leagues and called it a day.
I know in one of the lower league discords I'm in, any time a complaint about the D3 travel is levied, a conversation about how a few investors could prop up a D3 league in SoCal and focus it heavily into the Latino community is brought up. The issue is that in the US, the crown of "National Champion" will almost always prevail over logic. That's why "D4" leagues like NPSL, TLFC, and USL2 all have a national championship when just having 4-8 regional or conference champs should do. It's a reason why arena football is so messy. While setting up local, or regional, D3 leagues with between 8-16 teams would be smart, that would require people to be okay with not being a "National Champion." Which too many rich, egotistical people just aren't okay with.
I believe that. You'd like to think that they could get their heads around developing and selling players, and bragging about the fees they can get. Instead of "I flushed a TON of money down the toilet to fly my Cali team across the country, but I have a shiny trophy"
Can't imagine there's very many direct flights from Spokane, WA to Sherman, TX, or Statesboro, GA, or Mount Vernon, NY, or etc. etc. Which means they likely have to fly to a larger city, and bus in. A whole bunch of extra cost all for the chance to maybe win.
Ego. That's always the issue isn't it. Looking at everyone's favorite pyramid, England, you have leagues in different regions. For instance, a club I follow that is in London was just promoted to Level 9. Their regional league is all that matters for the most part. However, they do have a national tournament for their level, The FA Vase. Based on what level a club is at, it goes FA Cup > FA Trophy > FA Vase. USSF could create national cups that could fill this role.
"Potentially raising the D3 men’s PLS standards to match current USL L1 standards is in the cards. The light requirements for the PLS at the D3 level is how NISA skated by with provisional sanctioning for five years."
This portion is likely focused at mandating that any proper D3 pro clubs must have control or ownership of their own soccer specific stadium (SSS), the lack of which has undone too many lower league clubs to remember as well as fueling destructive SoccerWarz! However, the D3 PLS standards for the SSS will likely be 5000 seats. In other words, the current norm for USL League One!
Another interesting point is that the MLS doesn't seem to be involved in these discussions between US Soccer and the USL? I wonder what will happen to MLSNP with the revised PLS? AFAIK, many of the current MLSNP don't have their own SSS or piggyback on MLS first team facilities? Will a PLS waiver be granted to those MLSNP clubs or this will kill off most of the few remaining MLSNP independents?
I think one of the key things is MLS has its own standards now which are significantly higher than the USF one standard so they probably don’t need to be involved in any discussions, but we have to remember that this will go at some point in front of the pro league council which Don Garber effectively runs
The ultimate fate of MLSNP is fascinating as so many aspects of the MLSNP ecosystem is hidden or obscure. It's own regulatory framework is hidden, beyond sanctioning provided by US Soccer. Specifically, there are no CBA for MLSNP players, AFAIK no requirements regulating "owners" for the few MLSNP independents, fan attendance at MLSNP matches are difficult to impossible to determine, etc. But it sounds like the MLSNP is not mentioned at all, in the conversations you are hearing?
I would think the ownership standards would be the focus, as much or more than stadiums. Playing in high school football stadiums is unsightly, but the most egregious thing is not paying rent, referees, and players.
Agreed! However, ownership standards may be more difficult to police, since money is fungible and money trails can be buried under mountains of paperwork or difficult to audit. A primary owner may also suffer sudden financial reversal. In contrast, the SSS or lack thereof is irrefutable and tends to be more durable....
I had always understood the "enclosed" requirement for stadiums to mean that the team must be able to control the entrance and exit of people (i.e. a stadium is required to have fencing all around it so people couldn't just walk up. You can't play in an open park). It never really seemed to be that big of an issue, so I'm surprised it's up for discussion.
Getting the stadium requirement down to 10,000 would be optimal to make pro/rel work. A 15,000 seat stadium seems like just to much of a lift for smaller teams and teams who could find themselves in League One.
I don't know if I really like seeing the D3 standards raised unless they are going to begin sanctioning a D4 pro league. There really needs to be a space for creativity and less well financed clubs to be able to attempt going pro with less risk. The problem is the antics of the NISA is poisoning that well.
The time zone requirement is silly and should be totally done away with but if USSF is so set on it they should at least loosen it up. D1 3 of 4 time zones (East, Central, Mountain, West). D2 2 of 4. At least currently as far as I can tell there is no time zone requirement for D3 so that would remain. That way as you go up the pyramid you have more of a national footprint that the federation seems so set on without as much travel burden at the lower levels.
Either way, thank you Kartik for the reporting and the discussion. Can't wait to hear more from you on this front.
yeah, and as I said in the piece Chris, I did not even know that there were such a requirement I started talking to people. It seems like it’s something pretty standard as you said, but perhaps it’s also up for misinterpretation which is why they are talking about getting rid of it?
Yeah, probably just a misunderstanding. Either way an interesting wrinkle, if I remember correctly, at one point "enclosed" stadium was one of the issues NPSL had with Tulsa Athletic at Hicks Park.
I believe that "enclosed" has generally meant covered/shaded seating (I've read that somewhere previously). Controlled ingress/egress is actually covered separately as something that's applicable for all leagues.
I knew about the enclosed requirement before, and I was told the same thing. Covered/shaded seating OR a covered concourse.
You have to have one or the other.