—by Chris Rifer

A couple weeks ago we recapped the Timbers’ season and looked into the future for our beloved PTFC. This week we look back at the season that the MLS had, and what it needs to do – or not do – to continue growth.

Pieces like this are tough, because it is easy to come off as hypercritical and whiny. I imagine at some point over the next 2,700 words, including footnotes, I will come off as both. Keep in mind throughout that the league is doing a lot more right than it is doing wrong. The upward trajectory of MLS is prima facie evidence of that – nobody can seriously question that over the last three or four years the league has grown substantially in both popularity and quality. The league, however, still has areas that need improvement.

Finally, I regard these issues as equally important to Timbers fans as the issues facing the club. The reality is the MLS is still a fledgling league. Every club and its supporters have a vested interest in seeing the league develop. The bigger the league, the better the quality of soccer, the better the experience for everybody.

So, without further adieu, let’s pass judgment on Don Garber and the league under the guise of Good Don, Bad Don. As always, dissent is more than welcome.

Good Don

The Playoffs

There has been plenty of griping about the MLS Playoffs, primarily for the reason that it’s un-European. The argument goes that the season’s body of work should be the primary measure of success and should thereby determine the champion. All well and good. But let’s face it, a single-table points-winner-takes-all system without relegation could very well lead to the final months of the season being rendered pointless for most of the league.

Take this year, for example. If such a system had been in place, even with something like the top 3 or 4 qualifying for CCL, more than half the table would have been eliminated from meaningful competition by August. And here is the other thing: CCL play, while certainly a nice prize, doesn’t carry nearly the allure that the UEFA Champions League does. So, by August, with Galaxy virtually assured of winning the league, and only a handful of teams battling for a CCL spot they only moderately care about, we would have had a system in which more than half the league would be virtually playing for pride.

Instead, with the playoff system, we were treated to two months of thrilling soccer where virtually everybody[1] was still in contention. Until American soccer grows to the point of making relegation and promotion viable (which we’re not even close to, if it will ever happen), and until CCL truly becomes a major tournament (which we’re much closer to, but still have a ways to go), the playoffs create the most exciting league play of any system.

Relative Austerity

If you haven’t read Leander Schaerlaeckens’s article on the impending economic demise of European soccer, you should. The short of it is clubs have spent so wildly that several major European clubs are on the verge of financial collapse. We’re not talking Wigan and Napoli, folks, we’re talking clubs like Real Madrid, Barcelona, Manchester United, and Liverpool. Apparently you’re not the only one that thought $123 million for Ronaldo was crazy; turns out creditors did too (or at least they’re going to very soon).

Say what you will about MLS, but it has done a fantastic job of keeping payrolls modest while maximizing talent. Really, there are only a handful of gargantuan contracts in the league, with a number of other contracts that are bargains. Yes, as the league grows there will be greater necessity to shell out more money. But to date MLS has done a good job of avoiding the irrational exuberance of Europe, and has kept its fiscal house in decent order. The league should hold that principle sacred as the league continues to grow.

If European soccer does go through a major financial crisis, as may well happen in the next few years, there is going to be a lot of talent looking for a well-constructed, financially stable league to play in. MLS would be happy to oblige.

Past Expansion

Putting my anti-Seattle hat aside for just a moment, take an objective look at the MLS’s expansion decisions over the last three years. In three years MLS has added Seattle, Philadelphia, Vancouver and Portland. Now put together a list of the five best supported clubs in the league. All four of those clubs are on that list, with Portland, Philly and Seattle – in no particular order – solidly occupying the top three spots. Very shrewd.

Supporting Supporters

This has a foot in both camps, as the transformation is incomplete, but there is no question that over the past three years MLS has made great strides in making its product more supporter-friendly. A lot of people speak about this as being the supporter v. soccer mom choice. To me, that’s a bit of a false choice as I’ve seen plenty of happy soccer moms in Jeld-Wen Field – the most supporter-friendly venue in MLS. The league seems to acknowledge this more and more, and on most fronts is making good progress toward marketing itself to both groups.

There are still blemishes, however, with this year’s most prominent being the debacle in New England, as supporters were arrested for being rambunctious and yelling “[YSA]”. I agree that YSA is unoriginal, perhaps annoying, and to some could even be offensive. But arrest-worthy? If I’m Don Garber and I see something like that happen, I’m in the owner’s office the next morning. I know the league doesn’t have complete control over all of its franchises’ actions, but it certainly has the ability to shape the culture. That’s happening, but there is still work to do.

Bad Don

The Referees

This one has been well documented.[2]

Future Expansion

This is not impeachment of Montreal. The jury is still out on them, and there is no reason to believe they won’t have the success of other recent expansions. This is mostly about the seemingly imminent addition of another team in New York.

Every time I watch a Red Bull New York match, I am amazed at how well they coordinate the folks sitting at midfield to wear the proper colors of the Red Bull logo. Oh, wait.

Here is the reality, the existing franchise in New York is toward the bottom half of the league in terms of support. The Viking Army has plenty of class, but lacks the numbers. Sure, a lot of this has to do with the fact that Red Bull Arena is well outside the City, but if you add another franchise – even if it is in the City – what is to keep the Red Bulls from becoming Chivas East?

There are some decent options out there. Orlando has made a nice debut in USL Pro. Las Vegas is a tragically underserved sports city that provides scant entertainment options for the folks who live there – believe it or not, most of the folks who live in Vegas don’t spend every weekend on The Strip. Now that Tijuana has moved up to Mexico’s top division, San Diego is a little bit less viable, but if they are ever relegated San Diego becomes a gold mine. Minneapolis, Milwaukie, and Indianapolis – at least in the abstract – all provide some promise. Memphis and Nashville may work as well.

Here is the other sticking point, Garber seems determined to grow beyond 20, and soon. Why? The league is healthy at a smaller number. Leagues, with the NFL being the only exception, often immediately regret the decision to over-expand.

Here is my plan: Around 2015 add one more franchise in either Orlando or Vegas. Move Chivas to either the spurned of those two cities or San Diego. Then sit at 20 for a while. If the league continues to grow, there may come a point where expanding beyond 20 is more viable, but what’s the rush?

The Glamour Franchises

I understand why MLS would like to have Galaxy and NYRB be the league’s cornerstone franchises. They are the biggest markets with the most international draw. But this brings up the same issue, especially with NYRB. Does it do the league any good to have an international audience tune in to a Red Bulls match and see a half full stadium with modest atmosphere? No.

It’s time for a little bit of rebranding. The glamour franchises need to be the liveliest. I’m talking again about Philly, Portland, Seattle, and Real Salt Lake, etc. Instead of spinning its wheels trying to market a mediocre product out of New Jersey, why doesn’t the league double down on the clubs that have paid dividends?

Not to go too John Edwards on you, but it feels like we have two MLSs emerging. One MLS is new, cutting-edge, and exciting. It markets itself to a largely young, urban-based clientele who grew up playing and enjoy watching soccer.

The other MLS is the old, warmed-over MLS trying to empty the suburbs’ cul-de-sacs into to its stadia. Nothing against the suburbs, but relying on that exclusively is a broken business model. To be perfectly honest, NYRB feels awfully old MLS to me, and that’s not the image the league wants to project.

Portland is fortunate insofar as it has that large group of young urbanites, and also a large group of folks who have been following PTFC since the NASL days. That’s the cornerstone of the franchise, and it’s a really strong one. Would that cornerstone be nearly as strong if they named the franchise the Portland Pioneers and built a generic 25,000 seat soccer-specific stadium in Wilsonville? That’s basically the old MLS business model – the Red Bulls’ model – and ultimately why the Red Bulls shouldn’t be a flagship franchise.

The Myriad Player Acquisition Mechanisms

Player acquisition in the MLS is absurdly confusing. There are no fewer than 12 player acquisition methods in MLS, including the allocation rankings, the SuperDraft, the Supplemental Draft, the Re-Entry Draft, discovery signings, home-grown player signings, the lottery, trades, and a few more minor ones. Ugh.

First off, many of these acquisition methods create the perverse incentive for a club that has been eliminated from contention to tank in hopes of boosting their positions in the respective rankings. It’s one thing to play for pride if it only affects one or two spots in the draft – like a team in the NBA or NFL – but it is another altogether when it affects nearly every method listed above and the amount of allocation money the league gives you.

Certainly one of the challenges a league has in putting together its player acquisition system is balancing the interest in parity with creating too great an incentive to tank. EPLitis, a common disease amongst top-flight soccer leagues in which the league is dominated year-in-and-year-out by a select few clubs, is certainly to be avoided. The MLS, however, has struck the balance too far on the side of parity in giving teams – almost literally – dozens of reasons to sacrifice meaningless late fixtures.

For one, I would challenge Garber to name one good reason why the Supplemental Draft, the Re-entry Draft (which is actually two drafts), and the lottery couldn’t just be replaced by a free market approach more like what is used internationally. Also, do allocation rankings serve any proper purpose other than to bury some of our best domestic talent on bad teams?[3]

I would dramatically simplify the system. Keep the SuperDraft and trades because they’re fun.[4] Institute a more free market approach with signings outside of those processes – be it signings of MLS players who are out of contract, foreign talent, young off-draft-cycle domestic talent, or veteran American talent returning from overseas. Keep allocation money, but make it so that every team that doesn’t make the playoffs gets the same amount so as to limit perverse incentives. So the 11^th team in the table would get the same amount as the 19^th. Finally, keep home-grown signings to promote the development of academies.

Finally, and here is the big one, make everything public. No more “we’re not disclosing how much allocation money we spent, or how much allocation money we have” garbage. Putting that stuff in the public forum gives everybody something else to write about, something else to complain about, and something else to create buzz about. It makes the offseason livelier and creates gossip about who is legitimately in the market to make big moves. On the whole, it would give people a lot more to talk about with MLS, which is just what the doctor ordered.

Wow, spent a lot of time on that one. Moving on…

The Playoff Format

I actually like the 10-team format. I’m fine with the single-match, higher seed gets home field format for the wild card rounds. The two leg aggregate goal series in the conference semis is a lot of fun. As I wrote about a couple weeks ago, the first leg of such a series very often produces some thrilling soccer, and depending on how the series goes, the second leg can be just as enthralling – as the middle of the Red Bulls – Galaxy second leg showed. So, to this point, I love it.

But after that, what the heck is MLS thinking? The conference finals, inexplicably, revert to the single-match, higher seed hosts format. Considering getting a draw on the road against equal competition is considered a quality result in soccer, to have this format for the conference finals is manifestly unjust. Just as the stakes are getting high, the MLS stacks the deck.[5]

If that’s not enough, though, then the MLS decides to put the MLS Cup in a neutral location. Really? Last year it was in Toronto. You want to play the biggest game of the year – between Colorado and Dallas – in Toronto? Toronto?![6]

Location problems aside, why would the league ever want to put its most important match in a neutral site, likely thousands of miles from the supporters of one or both teams? Or worse yet, as we’re going to experience, why would you ever give one team such a huge, completely fortuitous, advantage in the off-chance that the “neutral location” is their home stadium?[7] Wouldn’t you rather have two matches with packed stadia and frenzied supporters to trot out on primetime television as a two-part advertisement for American soccer to the country and the world?

Here is the solution, and again, it’s about simplicity. Keep the format for the wild card play-in. Then, everything is home-and-home aggregate goals series. Wild card matches on Wednesday. Conference semis on Saturday/Sunday and Wednesday/Thursday. Conference finals on the following Saturday/Sunday and Wednesday/Thursday. Time off for FIFA dates. Then the leg one of the MLS Cup on Thursday night, and leg two on Tuesday night in primetime.

Remember when I promised not to make this a whine-fest? Then I went off and spent 750 words on the good stuff and 1,500 on bad stuff. But trust me when I tell you that the league is doing much more right than it is wrong.

I should probably just stop.

Onward, Rose City!