USL and USSF are creating their own structure that leaves everybody else out- Should the most critical structural decisions in the recent history of soccer be left just to those two?
"Everyone needs to get involved in the process" may be the call to action the country needs!
I wonder if what the country also needs is more soccer pitches, big and small? Any random country in Europe has more pitches per capita than the U.S. Each of these could then be the basis of a community club that could then rise up through the future pyramid?
I agree. Also, I don't think we need to build out 10K seat stadiums to start with. A lot of local communities would be fine with 500-2500 seat community stadiums. Or as my friend said, stop building stadiums in downtown, unless it's a smaller city/town. Build some pitches out in the suburbs and that will help in the creation of new clubs. The big cities are where it's tricky as there may not be as much land available. Where I live, there is plenty of space.
I think the sweet spot for stadiums is 7500 kind of like Buffalo is doing. Especially if we can get those guys making the stadium, for them, to make stadiums for other teams at 10 million.
Where does USSF state this? From what I've read, USSF wants nothing to do with dictating pro/rel. Matter of fact, the phrase "promotion/relegation" isn't even found in the PLS. Why is the onus for PLS only on USSF? I'm willing to bet that if USL came up with their own criteria for designating the different divisions for an open pyramid, USSF would go along with it. The thing is, I've never heard of a league actually submitting a proposed PLS to USSF. All the leagues choose to follow what USSF has laid out.
If all the non-MLS leagues get together and make a go at it, do you really think USSF is going to disavow them? It's one thing to go against the NASL. It's another to go against 60+ professional clubs, 1000s of amateur clubs, and 10000s of youth clubs.
The USSF does not state this, but is the reason why USL cannot currently create an open pyramid not because of the PLS? Is there any indication on their part they would be content in competing without USSF sanction?
If the USL does not care about USSF sanctioning, then it would be ridiculously easy to create an open pyramid, given reasonable license fees. Semi-pro clubs from the numerous overlapping amateur leagues would be overjoyed to join the pyramid as they are then offered the chance to go pro on merit, to the point 8 conferences at both D5 and D6 would be possible.
USSF has left it up to the individual leagues to decide on pro/rel. No professional league has ever tried it before. I can't see USSF not sanctioning USL and I'm sure there are at least planned talks about updating PLS. All the lower leagues are just as fractured. It's gonna take a meeting of the minds for it all to come together. But if lower league leaders don't reach out, why should USL accommodate them?
Having those 8 regions would be great. Bringing in the state associations to manage below D6 would be even better. So much potential. I think we can get this right by 2028.
The USSF has assuredly not left it up to individual leagues to decide on pro/rel considering the PLS however. For example, a semi-pro club is unable to be promoted to third division if its owner’s net worth is not at least $10m.
The most pivotal thing to enable a genuine pyramid would be USSF doing away with the majority of PLS to allow pro/rel both within the 3 professional divisions and between the semi-pro and pro systems. Until both are changed, then true pro/rel is impossible; perhaps the USL or other parties should be blamed for not having petitioned to change the PLS already, but until the PLS are changed, the USL’s hands are tied.
Of course USSF left it up to the individual leagues. That's how USL just announced they were implementing pro/rel. The current PLS hasn't been updated with pro/rel language in it. They are the first professional league in the US to make such an announcement. USSF didn't say "hey USL, go implement pro/rel". "And go create a new Div 1 so you'll have 3 divisions so it works better". Notice you haven't heard a response from USSF saying USL can't do pro/rel.
USL is implementing pro/rel to the best of the parameters set for it by USSF. I’m not sure why you fail to recognize that that pro/rel has not been explicitly prohibited does not mean pro/rel is still extremely restricted by the USSF. If you’ll notice in the first section of article below, much focus is given to PLS bc the USL is need to structure its first division around PLS, rather than simply having the most competitive clubs play in the first division as works elsewhere.
A couple (good faith) questions to such a radical proposal:
Has there been any sort of rumors regarding the USL entertaining such a radical proposal?
Wouldn’t part of the risk be in CONCACAF and FIFA then vanquishing USL to a “rogue”status (a bit like the current version of the Canadian Soccer League?
Do you think that the sort of investors that some hope that USL could potentially attract would backtrack mot wanting any parts of that?
Several players from the USL Championship, League One and even League Two and a few from the Super League get called up for national team duty. Any worries about players from smaller national team programs (such as the one that I support, Puerto Rico) not wanting to risk
possibility of suffering the consequences for playing in an unsanctioned league?
Thank you and others in advance that are pondering such a move for your feedback.
Someone pointed out to me that the US has a history of using players from unsanctioned leagues. The NCAA is not sanctioned. Also, there are plenty of nations that use players that only play for US colleges.
I seem to remember an article dealing with the NASL lawsuit that mentioned FIFA preferring pro/rel to be implemented in the US. They understand that with pro/rel, the sport grows a lot more in what is the biggest sports market.
As for investors, they may be waiting to see the actual pro/rel plan before committing.
To my knowledge, I don't know of anyone mentioning a proposal to making an open pyramid. Honestly, that's why I wrote the article because I'm afraid no one has really thought about all the work that needs to be done beforehand.
You are correct, all of the issues apply. Players/coaches would be unable to compete in international competitions, clubs would be unable to compete in the US Open Cup or Concacaf Champions League, and also, the USL would have to find a new referee association to manage their matches.
"Everyone needs to get involved in the process" may be the call to action the country needs!
I wonder if what the country also needs is more soccer pitches, big and small? Any random country in Europe has more pitches per capita than the U.S. Each of these could then be the basis of a community club that could then rise up through the future pyramid?
I agree. Also, I don't think we need to build out 10K seat stadiums to start with. A lot of local communities would be fine with 500-2500 seat community stadiums. Or as my friend said, stop building stadiums in downtown, unless it's a smaller city/town. Build some pitches out in the suburbs and that will help in the creation of new clubs. The big cities are where it's tricky as there may not be as much land available. Where I live, there is plenty of space.
I think the sweet spot for stadiums is 7500 kind of like Buffalo is doing. Especially if we can get those guys making the stadium, for them, to make stadiums for other teams at 10 million.
Where does USSF state this? From what I've read, USSF wants nothing to do with dictating pro/rel. Matter of fact, the phrase "promotion/relegation" isn't even found in the PLS. Why is the onus for PLS only on USSF? I'm willing to bet that if USL came up with their own criteria for designating the different divisions for an open pyramid, USSF would go along with it. The thing is, I've never heard of a league actually submitting a proposed PLS to USSF. All the leagues choose to follow what USSF has laid out.
If all the non-MLS leagues get together and make a go at it, do you really think USSF is going to disavow them? It's one thing to go against the NASL. It's another to go against 60+ professional clubs, 1000s of amateur clubs, and 10000s of youth clubs.
The USSF does not state this, but is the reason why USL cannot currently create an open pyramid not because of the PLS? Is there any indication on their part they would be content in competing without USSF sanction?
If the USL does not care about USSF sanctioning, then it would be ridiculously easy to create an open pyramid, given reasonable license fees. Semi-pro clubs from the numerous overlapping amateur leagues would be overjoyed to join the pyramid as they are then offered the chance to go pro on merit, to the point 8 conferences at both D5 and D6 would be possible.
USSF has left it up to the individual leagues to decide on pro/rel. No professional league has ever tried it before. I can't see USSF not sanctioning USL and I'm sure there are at least planned talks about updating PLS. All the lower leagues are just as fractured. It's gonna take a meeting of the minds for it all to come together. But if lower league leaders don't reach out, why should USL accommodate them?
Having those 8 regions would be great. Bringing in the state associations to manage below D6 would be even better. So much potential. I think we can get this right by 2028.
The USSF has assuredly not left it up to individual leagues to decide on pro/rel considering the PLS however. For example, a semi-pro club is unable to be promoted to third division if its owner’s net worth is not at least $10m.
The most pivotal thing to enable a genuine pyramid would be USSF doing away with the majority of PLS to allow pro/rel both within the 3 professional divisions and between the semi-pro and pro systems. Until both are changed, then true pro/rel is impossible; perhaps the USL or other parties should be blamed for not having petitioned to change the PLS already, but until the PLS are changed, the USL’s hands are tied.
Of course USSF left it up to the individual leagues. That's how USL just announced they were implementing pro/rel. The current PLS hasn't been updated with pro/rel language in it. They are the first professional league in the US to make such an announcement. USSF didn't say "hey USL, go implement pro/rel". "And go create a new Div 1 so you'll have 3 divisions so it works better". Notice you haven't heard a response from USSF saying USL can't do pro/rel.
USL is implementing pro/rel to the best of the parameters set for it by USSF. I’m not sure why you fail to recognize that that pro/rel has not been explicitly prohibited does not mean pro/rel is still extremely restricted by the USSF. If you’ll notice in the first section of article below, much focus is given to PLS bc the USL is need to structure its first division around PLS, rather than simply having the most competitive clubs play in the first division as works elsewhere.
https://open.substack.com/pub/beyondthe90/p/visions-of-a-the-future-usl-pyramid?r=l8uoq&utm_medium=ios
Greetings, Sir.
A couple (good faith) questions to such a radical proposal:
Has there been any sort of rumors regarding the USL entertaining such a radical proposal?
Wouldn’t part of the risk be in CONCACAF and FIFA then vanquishing USL to a “rogue”status (a bit like the current version of the Canadian Soccer League?
Do you think that the sort of investors that some hope that USL could potentially attract would backtrack mot wanting any parts of that?
Several players from the USL Championship, League One and even League Two and a few from the Super League get called up for national team duty. Any worries about players from smaller national team programs (such as the one that I support, Puerto Rico) not wanting to risk
possibility of suffering the consequences for playing in an unsanctioned league?
Thank you and others in advance that are pondering such a move for your feedback.
Someone pointed out to me that the US has a history of using players from unsanctioned leagues. The NCAA is not sanctioned. Also, there are plenty of nations that use players that only play for US colleges.
I seem to remember an article dealing with the NASL lawsuit that mentioned FIFA preferring pro/rel to be implemented in the US. They understand that with pro/rel, the sport grows a lot more in what is the biggest sports market.
As for investors, they may be waiting to see the actual pro/rel plan before committing.
To my knowledge, I don't know of anyone mentioning a proposal to making an open pyramid. Honestly, that's why I wrote the article because I'm afraid no one has really thought about all the work that needs to be done beforehand.
Thank you very much for sharing your thoughts and the efforts involved.
Much appreciated.
You are correct, all of the issues apply. Players/coaches would be unable to compete in international competitions, clubs would be unable to compete in the US Open Cup or Concacaf Champions League, and also, the USL would have to find a new referee association to manage their matches.