World Soccer XXX: We Have Men Too!

[Jimjamesak]

If you want the 2023 numbers, there’s only seven teams above 6k average right now.

And none of them are above the worst MLS numbers.

[Kepler]

Speaking for myself I would love relegation in the MLB and would have loved it when we were owned by the Ponzis, as a spur for them to sell.

The way for leagues to be fair is a very small window between floor and ceiling for salaries, and then let the owners reap the rewards or eat the punishment for finishing better or worse. I'm not sure how you do the latter -- prize money for wins, maybe? Fines for losses? Reward the owners and front office who are efficient and punish those that are stupid.

Ideally you do that by getting rid of private ownership entirely and letting the cities own their teams and hire their management teams. Under those circumstances, then, maybe Pro-Rel would work.

It would be great to see a city rise through the ranks (or crater). It would really generate interest and make fans loyal to their teams. Have the Podunk Prairie Scents of Pig Pi-ss promote to level-1 and play in Yankee Stadium. The superstars would still command near-infinite compensation. Media rights held by the league and distributed back to teams based on their finish would create the incentive for teams to make smart decisions. Players will always be incentivized to play their best. In principle you don't even have to take the wealthy sociopaths out of the equation to make that work, though obviously it would be more family friendly to decapitate them and their children at home plate on Mother's Day.

[JF_Gophers]

The facts say that is a lie.

The highest attendance for a USL League One team, the third division, was Forward Madison at an average of 3843 per game.

For the USL Championship, the second division, the lowest average attendance (not counting an MLS 2 team) was Miami FC at 1162. There were 15 other USLC teams below 6k

source

I blame mobile for that. It was totals for 23, but not aligned!

So, I mean I tried to research it!

[Slap Shot]

It wouldn't work in MLB because the upper level teams already have multiple teams in the lower divisions. How do you pick which teams elevate?

For MLS do all teams play a balanced schedule similar to the EPL where every team plays each other twice?

[Jimjamesak]

I blame mobile for that. It was totals for 23, but not aligned!

So, I mean I tried to research it!

TBF, I was researching on mobile as well. ;-)

I used the 2022 numbers because it’s still pretty early for the 2023 numbers. By the end of August we should have a clearer picture for 2023.

[Jimjamesak]

It wouldn't work in MLB because the upper level teams already have multiple teams in the lower divisions. How do you pick which teams elevate?

For MLS do all teams play a balanced schedule similar to the EPL where every team plays each other twice?

No, you can’t do that with 29 teams. I don’t think they even play every team now. AFAIK it’s twice against each team in your conference plus some games against some teams in the other conference.

[Jimjamesak]

USL Championship doesn’t have a balance schedule either (24 teams).

[Kepler]

It wouldn't work in MLB because the upper level teams already have multiple teams in the lower divisions. How do you pick which teams elevate?

You break all the team connections apart. No more affiliates. No more draft. Players enter into MLB as free agents and anyone can sign them. The only limit is the salary cap and floor for each level, which ascends slowly for the lower divisions and then more steeply for the top level.

Teams that overcommit to salary and drop a level are still on the hook to compensate the player, but that player is released back into the free agent pool (teams must do this until their cap-counting commitment drop below cap).

There are no limits for compensating any one player. If you want to win now and defray your payments and destroy your future team, fine, just try selling that team with those commitments later.

[Jimjamesak]

You break all the team connections apart. No more affiliates. No more draft. Players enter into MLB as free agents and anyone can sign them. The only limit is the salary cap and floor for each level, which ascends slowly for the lower divisions and then more steeply for the top level.

“Welcome everyone to the fifteenth straight Dodgers-Yankees World…”

Also, salary caps and pro/rel don’t mix well. I know I’d be PO’d if my team was relegated simply because we couldn’t sign injury replacements. Unless the roster sizes expand significantly, then we’re back to problem #1.

[Kepler]

“Welcome everyone to the fifteenth straight Dodgers-Yankees World…”

That was the 50s, with the current system.

How, though, if everybody has the same salary total plus or minus say 5%?

[Jimjamesak]

The big thing I think people don’t really know about pro/rel is that it’s an old system that is struggling to adapt to the modern sports world. It was a lot easier to work when:

- There was a maximum player salary (abolished in England in 1961)

- There wasn’t automatic pro/rel between the fourth and fifth tiers (not instituted until 1986)

- Broadcasting deals weren’t a thing (first real English broadcasting deal was in 1983)

- Players didn’t have free agency (that took until the Bosman ruling in 1995)

- Leagues could restrict the number of foreign players on rosters (Bosman ruling also took this away for EU countries)

And that’s not even getting into the difficulties of implementing it in the US like travel and a lack of population density.

[Jimjamesak]

That was the 50s, with the current system.

How, though, if everybody has the same salary total plus or minus say 5%?

First draft wasn’t held until 1965. Before then, the Yankees and Dodgers could sign any and every amateur player they wanted.

And there are ways to get around salary caps, which is easier to do in New York and LA.

[Kepler]

First draft wasn’t held until 1965. Before then, the Yankees and Dodgers could sign any and every amateur player they wanted.

And there are ways to get around salary caps, which is easier to do in New York and LA.

I mean part of what you're arguing here is places without people won't be able to compete. But is that really a bug? This is very much like the Electoral College -- why are we giving rural people more rights than the larger number of individuals who live in cities (hint: racism).

But even so, this can be fixed continually splitting and re-splitting urban centers with more and more competition, which will happen. London has, what, six major and twelve meh major clubs? NYC might have 8 teams, but at any given time only a couple would be in the first tier.

If there is an advantage to teams in large markets because players receive compensation outside the salary cap, then make the players total income the cap hit to the team regardless of whether the owner is paying or not. Above all, split the media rights equally across the league. In fact, incorporate all 5 or 10 or 15 levels into one structure and subsidize the lower levels by skimming revenue from the top. But again, this is only really possibly if you make it all a public utility and get rid of private investment, which WILL drive towards concentration and dominance and warp the league just like it warps real life.

[Jimjamesak]

I mean part of what you're arguing here is places without people won't be able to compete. But is that really a bug? This is very much like the Electoral College -- why are we giving rural people more rights than the larger number of individuals who live in cities (hint: racism).

But even so, this can be fixed continually splitting and re-splitting urban centers with more and more competition, which will happen. London has, what, six major and twelve meh major clubs? NYC might have 8 teams, but at any given time only a couple would be in the first tier.

If there is an advantage to teams in large markets because players receive compensation outside the salary cap, then make the players total income the cap hit to the team regardless of whether the owner is paying or not. Above all, split the media rights equally across the league. In fact, incorporate all 5 or 10 or 15 levels into one structure and subsidize the lower levels by skimming revenue from the top. But again, this is only really possibly if you make it all a public utility and get rid of private investment, which WILL drive towards concentration and dominance and warp the league just like it warps real life.

Well, part of the “appeal” according to the prorel4USA zealots is that pro/rel “allows” any team to compete at the highest level. That’s their big selling point.

Even if you do rid everything of the corporate elements all you’re doing is trading one a-hole for another. The more successful teams aren’t going to want to subsidize the level 10 teams no matter who’s in charge, even the Soviets had this problem.

[Kepler]

The more successful teams aren't going to want to subsidize the level 10 teams no matter who's in charge, even the Soviets had this problem.

And the answer to that is: f-ck them. The more successful teams' management will personally benefit from being good at their jobs. The politicians will be incentified to benefit from the Mayor Lindsey Effect. The league itself will be a separate creature from the owners, being run as a non-profit public good, so regulate it with serious oversight and don't let any criminal POS near it, to guard it from becoming Italian.

Unlike the water utility or the energy utility, the average boob will actually pay attention to sports integrity, because he has f-cked up priorities.

The Soviet problem was the deliberate cultivation of a couple teams as feeders for the national team for geopolitical prestige, with a healthy dose of good old corruption thrown in. You don't really have the former problem, and you make it anathema in the culture. As for the latter, you reinforce rule of law and equality and whenever a Republican or other scumbag surfaces you shoot him into the sun.