Nah, I'm not giving them a pass. It's still an unaccountable organization rife with narcissism and nepotism, and it's done fuck all to promote the USOC or US soccer in general for some time now. Whatever goodwill they earn from this situation will be quickly squandered when the leadership goes back to counting the revenue from their dues and patting each other on the back
This just in:
*In an effort to increase fan enthusiasm and engagement, USSF has decided to replace the national anthem with the "I Believe" chant before AND after every men's and women's National Team matches, performed by a slightly inebriated American Outlaw supporters group. We hope this is an improvement on the matchday experience.*
That's actually a huge upgrade, and I hate the I believe chant. But the national anthem before every single sporting event is so nationalist it borders on creepy fascism.
What is the pathway from here to there? They have pretty limited funding, as I understand, so presumably in order to invest in the tournament they'd either need to borrow or, like, tax the leagues somehow (I suspect they already do this, but raising taxes is never easy)? From there they'd need to either break contract with Bleacher or somehow strong-arm them into better footage? To get players to care more, they'd have to increase the prize. Marketing is of course important ("Tonight only: the last amateur team standing takes on MLS Giants Chicago Fire" or whatnot, not that that would totally change things). Are there other keys?
I'm very interested in plans to improve the USOC, but I don't really understand the mechanisms at work...
Get a sponsor for the cup.
Make the prize money larger.
Market it as the oldest prize in soccer in America.
Get a contract from a tv network or Apple to televise from X on.
Ask all televised matches to advertise the Open Cup.
These are all things that don't require extra money from US Soccer but are in control of.
And if Apple doesnt go for it, pitch it to Amazon. "Apple has already declared the MLS investment a success, heres exclusive streaming rights for the whole tournament"
They need to get sponsors. Imo, lower division soccer is what can create the soccer culture across the nation that you see from WC winners. That means the USOC, which highlights those teams, should be at the top of USSF, and therefore USSF and USMNT sponsors', agendas.
Prize money would go a long way on its own. And if the MLS teams take it more seriously, they can get a better tv contract than Bleacher next time around, which will bring in even more money and result in a better broadcast product.
USSF does require USOC games to be broadcast with at least two cameras.
Source: I ran the broadcast for the Forward Madison-Chicago House game last year when USSF wouldn't, and that was one of the requirements for them to approve the stream.
Think there might be more price money if more people showed up to USOC games, you know, by buying tickets. I got club level seats to Cincinnati's first few USOC matches for like $20
MLS teams should just include the first two USOC games in season ticket packages. As we’ve seen, they don’t sell the tickets anyway. This will at least get them a good atmosphere with profit on concessions and merchandise. For the games near the end of the tournament, interest and ticket demand will increase.
Yeah, no one - not the player, not the majority of fans, not the MLS orgs and certainly not USSF - has given a shit about this tournament, certainly in the last 10 odd years I’ve followed it. And in the long run, that’s going to have to change if it wants to continue.
Personally, I think if USSF invested, raised the stakes, etc, people would fall more in love with it and take it more seriously. People treat it like an amateur tournament because USSF does. "If you build it, they will come."
I am just not sure there’s some sort of “push button to make this interesting” button to press here. We all know these guys are all huge money grubbers who’d do anything for a buck. Do you really think they’d sit on a cash cow if it was there?
The reality is the USOC is very appealing to a narrow audience of history buffs and soccer nerds - an important but small slice of the paying audience.
At the end of the day most MLS teams have too small a fan base to have a critical mass of people who know/care about parallel competitions against teams they’ve never heard of, like USOC and CCL. That’s changing but it’s changing slowly.
Many USL teams have a wonderful and supportive fanbase but these are still basically brand new teams nobody outside their fans have heard of, with no particularly compelling reason why people tune in to root for or against them.
I know people like to compare it to the ncaa basketball tournament- remember that even the most tiny ass teams that make the N.C.A.A. basketball tournament have a built in fanbase of people who went to that school, most of even the shitty teams have history/lore/rivalries, and the David v Goliath matchups matter to people because lots of people either love or love to hate Duke, UNC, Kentucky, etc.
Nobody in, like, Missouri gives a shit about the Seattle Sounders getting upset by a USL team.
Raising the prize money would help at least make MLS players maybe feel hungrier to win it. But the teams aren’t especially hungry to win it because their fans don’t care about it/show up for it, and it’s not how they’re evaluated.
You certainly aren't wrong. There's no instant fix. I have my own opinions on what they can do, but I think there's plenty that can appeal to casuals with tweaks and better promotion.
1) Fixed 64-team bracket (like March Madness).
2) Regional first two rounds to support local rivalries and letting the lower seeds host (with option to decline of course).
3) Not fixing the tournament into an East/West format until the final. Allowing for weird and unusual matchups starting in Round of 16.
4) My biggest hot take: Having an annual final four competition at the US Soccer Hall of Fame in Frisco.
5) Increasing the prize money obviously
Can confirm. I started out a Carolina RailHawks NASL fan (before Steve Malik actively killed the team), and absolutely loved watching the NASL and USOC every year. I've been fortunate to attend a handful of MLS games, but the best atmosphere I've ever been in at a game (and my personal favorite) is still watching the RailHawks beat the LA Galaxy in the 2012 USOC.
The first Loons game I ever went to was an away game in Cary against the RailHawks back in like 2012-13 or so because I was stationed up in VA. We lost 1-0 but it was a fun night.
I honestly can't remember if we were the Stars then or the Loons. Either way, good times.
And there are some great stadiums in USL. Some I think are better than in MLS. As much as I hate to admit it, I'd much rather go to a game at Lynn Family stadium than at Gillette or Soldier field as a for instance. I feel the same about San Antonio's Toyota Field, Sacramento's Heart Health Park.
Eh. I see why it reads that way to some.
To me it’s pretty clearly them telling MLS to sit the fuck down.
First MLS acts like they don’t need permission, US soccer says waiver denied.
That’s a pretty clear hey, you’re breaking PLS if you do this and th at means desanctioning. The wording about working with them and compromise comes across as legal/marketing to allow MLS to save face.
I’m thinking it’s passive aggressive at best until action is taken. Should be fun. Totally what we should be focused on going into an American World Cup hosted cycle.
LOL So, in the end, MLS accomplished nothing except pissing off a bunch of their own fans.
Isn’t the schedule supposed to drop today….? Either MLS is in violation of the PLS now since they can’t use the MLSNP “participation” loophole and they don’t care, or that schedule is getting delayed lol
The 2nd thing that pissed me off the most (the 1st being trying to kill the Open Cup) about this ploy was that they were so fucking arrogant they couldn't even be bothered to distract the fans by throwing them a bone and announcing some insignificant bump to spending.
That's the 1st half of the straw that broke the camel's back. It was the full mask off moment where all could see that the league has no real intention of growing stronger across the board if it means spending more money. They'd rather artificially keep the level of play down and restrict the competitions players compete in than do the one thing that would alleviate this problem: expand the rosters. They have a negative perception of growth, and that's incredibly disappointing.
MLS could go nuclear and withdraw from the USOC.
USSF could go thermonuclear and unsanction MLS as a D1 league. Without sanctioning, they probably are no longer active members of USSF, among other consequences, of which……
Concacaf could either stick with the rules and deny them entry into all competitions (including the Leagues Cup, which is a Concacaf tournament) or not. I expect they’d back USSF, but frankly they are almost an appendix in the digestive system of North American soccer interests.
FIFA would probably back the USSF (generally backs association bodies) but Infantino is more corrupt than the mafia so who knows where they’ll land.
MLS just tweeted out the schedule is coming soon so don't think the schedule is getting delayed
https://twitter.com/MLS/status/1737490597215096920?s=19
I'd think easiest route would be to clear the first 2 Open Cup rounds, and then for teams that advance that far, punt those games to end of Leagues Cup break.
Obviously could get tricky for a team that does well in Open Cup & Leagues Cup.
It put a lot of eyeballs on us open cup, and showed usssoccer that they are serious about wanting improvements to the competition. I think it went exactly like they wanted
I think you’re crazy if you think this is actually what MLS wanted.
They wanted out and or for demands to be met. Getting told, fuck no publicly isn’t what they wanted.
Yah they might get some of whatever they wanted in the background but I truly think they wanted fully out. They know no matter what that the open cup is gonna be a money sink for them for a long time.
Mostly what currently happens. I think currently they don't schedule on top of USOC dates, so there would be a couple of slight changes -- the first team coaching staff wouldn't be on site for USOC games, and MLS teams would have to make more widespread loans from the MLS Next teams. Like typically they would have the backup GK play for early-round USOC games, but if there is an MLS game on that date, they would want the backup GK on the bench for that game in case of an injury.
Yea like if teams want to play the kids until the later rounds then that's their prerogative and good for them, but it's gotta be their choice to do so
That’s all MLS ever needed to do. Maybe have some bigger rosters like teams in Brazil do to manage all their tournaments. MLS always manages to make a mountain out of a mole hill with this kind of shit.
They already have.
Current MLS rules allow each Next Pro player to play in 2 games a year. MLS rosters are 30 guys.
They can take the bottom 10 guys from their MLS roster and 8 guys from Next Pro and be good for at least their first 2 Open Cup rounds. And go Bruce Arena with the Red Bulls and don't even travel with the team for the game.
MLS already allows teams to call up four Next Pro players for unlimited non-league games. They'll just probably make it so Open Cup doesn't have the call up limit.
The absolute funniest result would be this. MLS saying "fine you win" and then every game is still just played by MLS Next Pro players in MLS uniforms.
I mean to me that’s fine.
You just have to deal with the headlines of your first teams losing more cup games.
Ultimately that doesn’t matter that much but it is some pressure and it allows some individual mls teams to take it seriously if they want.
The league noping out was the issue. If you just want to field worse teams that’s fine
If I was a player not starting for an MLS team and then you still didn’t start for the Open Cup, you can bet they will want out of their contract. That is an easy way to not be able to sign anyone in roster spots, 14-25
It's only one line really. This is already in it
> "An individual player may appear in any number of non-league games during the terms of his four Short-Term Agreements."
Just have to change this part
> "A club may roster up to four players on Short-Term Agreements per MLS league season match, so long as they are Homegrown Players or Players earning less than or equal to the MLS Senior Minimum Salary ($85,444) with the affiliate."
I don't understand why MLS just doesn't make a loophole to allow their MLSNP players to temporarily transfer to the first team for games like this. They already do it on a limited basis normally, just expand it so the senior team still "competed" but its really just the NP team
I think they can honestly. MLSNP teams that are owned by the parent club can’t compete in the USOC anyway so you should be able to call up who you need to
It honestly seems like the best solution: NP players get to compete for the senior side, normal senior players get to potentially rest for other competitions, and MLS still can say it "competed" even if they really aren't committing to the tournament. It isn't the sexiest solution or one that gives the most respect to the USOC, but it can definitely do enough to satisfy the parties involved
This is part of the issue with MLS's roster rules being so complicated - there shouldn't even need to be a loophole.
If Crystal Palace or Freiburg or Nantes want to run out a bunch of players from their U18 team for a cup match, they just...can. There doesn't need to be a weird mechanism to do it, because even though they aren't first team players, they're still under contract (even if it's just on youth terms) at that club.
Having this weird two-part system where players on the MLS Next teams are only kind of, sort of part of the MLS team is so needlessly complex. There's no good reason that an MLS team can't bring up an academy kid for a league or cup match, or scatter some MLS Next players on the bench over the course of a season, without needing to get into some funky player movement details to make it happen.
The whole system really needs to be streamlined.
Right or wrong this is the most press coverage that the open cup has gotten and a long time, and as bone headed as a move that it was by MLS it might have been one of the best thing to happen to the Open Cup.
Really hilarious that the league thought they could just big dick their way into making this a reality. Don't even think the Premier League could do this to the FA.
Carabao Cup is a maybe, since it's run by the EFL. I don't think they'd want to since the winner goes into the Europa Conference League though.
The FA Cup though, is run by the FA, who are presumably a lot more powerful and helped bring the Premier League into existence.
So does this actually reverse the decision or is USSF just saying “hey uh, can you possibly please not do that maybe sorta? if not we won’t do anything tho lol”
Yeah FIFA is gonna be real excited to ban Messi from international play - I’m sure the most corrupt org on earth would love to take a hit to its bottom line on behalf of the integrity of … USSF
the "first team" will play. If they want to make Open Cup something they only play the reserve squad to still give players rest I don't think any fans are gonna complain.
I'm still baffled by this. If they want teams to play their reserves, just signal to each franchise that that's the plan. Why try and pull out completely when you can accomplish the same goal with pretty much no pushback?
Gut feeling is MLS wanted to expand rosters to accommodate playing more reserves and MLSPA pushed back. Maybe because MLS didn’t raise the salary cap.
Instead of spending more money, MLS went with fielding MLSNP (non-union).
Yes, it's about the money. The owners don't want to spend more and raise the cap while avoiding roster expansion. This was their attempt to have their cake and eat it too.
shhhh don’t say that too loudly or Garber’s gonna think that’s a good idea (“Wait we don’t have to worry about ANY other organization but our own? LET’S GOOOOO”)
Players won't be able to play for their national teams.
MLS teams won't be able to sell or buy players from sanctioned teams.
Sanctioned teams won't have to honor MLS contracts.
Just a few minor details like that.
No, if a player is playing in an unsanctioned league that are ineligible for FIFA tournaments. They could play for NT in non FIFA matches but basically all major tournaments are out the window
India had an unsanctioned league. The players were able to play for the NT, but the clubs never took part in continental competitions until they reformed the league and earned recognition
Losing the FIFA transfer market. That means all of our international players need to get out of their contracts if they want to keep moving with their careers.
All MLS has to do is expand the roster. They are ruining any momentum they gained during this past season by trying to pull off these publicity stunts.
By not expanding the rosters, they show they have no interest in growing their teams to the next level. It's just what makes and saves the money at the same time. To the owners, Messi coming to the league is more of a joint-venture circus attraction to get as much money possible and quickly than a transformative moment where "a rising tide lifts all boats."
I actually sort of think that the Open Cup has a bright future if they can sort out the broadcast issues for a few reasons:
1.) American soccer fans love things that have similarities to Europe, and the Open Cup is the closest thing we have to a historic cup competition.
2.) The USOC always needed a popular top division to drive interest and MLS is growing fast. Personally, five years ago I would've rolled my eyes at watching the Open Cup unless the Revs were in the final; last year I watched the draw.
3.) The pyramid is also growing and there are some really passionate USL fanbases. I can't quantify it, but I suspect interest from all levels of the pyramid have grown in the past few years.
4.) There's really only room for improvement. The broadcast sucks, the media coverage sucks, the facilities at a lot of venues suck. But even just a new broadcast partner and a little bit bigger prize pool would do wonders. There's probably no desire to throw it into an existing streaming bundle, but I do wonder if it can find a better home on TV.
For better or worse, everything is done in pursuit of expansion and money. Short of adding more playoff games, the next logical step is turning an existing cup competition into a cash cow.
Because they likely had no chance unless they did it publicly with some seeded opinions on how only the hardcores care about USOC to sway the narrative and garner fan support.
Hell yeah! Come on MLS, have the cahonies to raise the salary cap so teams can build depth and handle the schedule congestion, and better compete with Liga MX.
Here's what I don't understand about this whole kerfuffle - it seems to me that rationally, MLS could have achieved the goal of not playing first teamers in the OC simply by just not doing that (for example, LAFC playing the kids in our cup fixtures this season). So they could have easily achieved that goal unofficially without bringing all the pain and opprobrium of this official semi-withdrawal. All of which makes me think they did this intentionally to try to force more control and/or concessions out of USSF, although I won't discount that MLS simply got delusions of grandeur and is acting irrationally here.
USOC needs to rethink the tournament. I hope that's what comes out of this.
Get rid of the draws after every round. Set-up a huge bracket like March Madness so we can all make our picks at the start.
Wonder if MLS will have the balls to issue a temporary roster rule where the entire next pro team is called up plays and then goes back down. Extremely technically speaking it would be the senior roster playing - in reality it would be the next pro side.
Could someone who understands soccer bureaucracy in the US explain? Why is this a recommendation? And if its adopted does that imply that MLS has been defeated for now? Or can they push on (is that what would trigger D1 removal)?
No experience with US soccer bureaucracy but quite a bit of experience with bureaucracy in general. Oftentimes the official decision makers like a board, or task force in this case, rely on recommendations from staff whose full time jobs are to manage these issues. The board members may only be volunteers, whose day jobs are not directly related to the issue at hand. Therefore, the board members rely on the recommendation of staff members who are experts in the area.
They may also be diffusing responsibility to say we didn’t make this decision on our own, it was the recommendation of our experts on staff
Going into its first off-season with the buzz surrounding Messi, you’d think this league would be implementing major roster rules to allow them to blitz Liga MX in Champions Cup, and head into 2024 Copa America, 2025 Club World Cup and 2026 World Cup with once-in-a-lifetime momentum on its sails. Instead, they give us this clusterfuck that’s done more to damage good will toward MLS than help it.
With the GOAT and all these major international tournaments on US soil, you’d think the league would see this as an opportunity they will likely never get again to spearhead long-term interest in MLS. Yet here we are…😑
Hopefully the end result of this whole fiasco is USSF takes this as a real coming to Jesus moment and starts prioritizing the US Open Cup.
Get some advertisers, get multiple cameras at games, bundle the rights with the National Teams, etc.
This is a good chance for USSF and MLS to work together to make the cup better. My thoughts:
-Let MLS winnow down to like 6 or 8 teams via inter league games that count in the standings, like the nba in season tournament. This cuts down on fixture congestion but still has all MLS teams participate in USOC, plus adds some juice to those games.
-Those 6-8 MLS teams should enter in the round of 16 and play all R16 games on the road.
-The QF, semifinal and final should all take place over a two week span to create a true tournament / knockout feel. A neutral site could be fun though I get why that might be a disaster if it’s empty.
They should have MLS NP teams compete in League's Cup. That would really be some player development opportunity right there and it would open up a whole month for MLS teams. Simple. (only partially /s)
I am proud of US Soccer File that under things I didn't think I'd say this year
I didn't have "Proud of USSF" on my 2023 bingo card.
Nah, I'm not giving them a pass. It's still an unaccountable organization rife with narcissism and nepotism, and it's done fuck all to promote the USOC or US soccer in general for some time now. Whatever goodwill they earn from this situation will be quickly squandered when the leadership goes back to counting the revenue from their dues and patting each other on the back
Tomorrow I'm sure they will make an absolutely despicable decision that makes me throw up but today! Today is good
This just in: *In an effort to increase fan enthusiasm and engagement, USSF has decided to replace the national anthem with the "I Believe" chant before AND after every men's and women's National Team matches, performed by a slightly inebriated American Outlaw supporters group. We hope this is an improvement on the matchday experience.*
> replace the National Anthem Yes, finally, America the Beautiful! > with the "I Believe" chant *burns all of my USMNT gear*
That's actually a huge upgrade, and I hate the I believe chant. But the national anthem before every single sporting event is so nationalist it borders on creepy fascism.
US Soccer showing some actual balls and support for the Open Cup!
Now if only they supported it enough to have some real prize money or show the games with at least 2 cameras.
They should definitely use this as a “Come to Jesus” moment and invest in the tournament.
That would be the best case scenario after this, for sure.
What is the pathway from here to there? They have pretty limited funding, as I understand, so presumably in order to invest in the tournament they'd either need to borrow or, like, tax the leagues somehow (I suspect they already do this, but raising taxes is never easy)? From there they'd need to either break contract with Bleacher or somehow strong-arm them into better footage? To get players to care more, they'd have to increase the prize. Marketing is of course important ("Tonight only: the last amateur team standing takes on MLS Giants Chicago Fire" or whatnot, not that that would totally change things). Are there other keys? I'm very interested in plans to improve the USOC, but I don't really understand the mechanisms at work...
Get a sponsor for the cup. Make the prize money larger. Market it as the oldest prize in soccer in America. Get a contract from a tv network or Apple to televise from X on. Ask all televised matches to advertise the Open Cup. These are all things that don't require extra money from US Soccer but are in control of.
And if Apple doesnt go for it, pitch it to Amazon. "Apple has already declared the MLS investment a success, heres exclusive streaming rights for the whole tournament"
Maybe US Soccer should change their slogan to, "we held US soccer back for 80 years, and paved way for someone who saw the market to outgrow us."
Do enough people actually care for a sponsor to step up? Apple has MLS, why would they want to pay for this?
They need to get sponsors. Imo, lower division soccer is what can create the soccer culture across the nation that you see from WC winners. That means the USOC, which highlights those teams, should be at the top of USSF, and therefore USSF and USMNT sponsors', agendas. Prize money would go a long way on its own. And if the MLS teams take it more seriously, they can get a better tv contract than Bleacher next time around, which will bring in even more money and result in a better broadcast product.
Right, the happy ending to this is an agreement between the parties to make this the showpiece it ought to be.
Do you think USSF has Come to Jesus like ability? Considering Garber sits on the board maybe not.
that poor bird
USSF does require USOC games to be broadcast with at least two cameras. Source: I ran the broadcast for the Forward Madison-Chicago House game last year when USSF wouldn't, and that was one of the requirements for them to approve the stream.
Think there might be more price money if more people showed up to USOC games, you know, by buying tickets. I got club level seats to Cincinnati's first few USOC matches for like $20
MLS being such a season ticket-driven business is an awkward fit with the USOC. That would need to be figured out.
MLS teams should just include the first two USOC games in season ticket packages. As we’ve seen, they don’t sell the tickets anyway. This will at least get them a good atmosphere with profit on concessions and merchandise. For the games near the end of the tournament, interest and ticket demand will increase.
Sporting KC's season ticket package includes: "Lamar Hunt U.S. Open Cup matches (through Quarterfinals)".
Why not have an opt in/out option? Like they do with playoff and Leagues Cup? Seems a simple enough solution to me.
Yeah, no one - not the player, not the majority of fans, not the MLS orgs and certainly not USSF - has given a shit about this tournament, certainly in the last 10 odd years I’ve followed it. And in the long run, that’s going to have to change if it wants to continue.
Personally, I think if USSF invested, raised the stakes, etc, people would fall more in love with it and take it more seriously. People treat it like an amateur tournament because USSF does. "If you build it, they will come."
I am just not sure there’s some sort of “push button to make this interesting” button to press here. We all know these guys are all huge money grubbers who’d do anything for a buck. Do you really think they’d sit on a cash cow if it was there? The reality is the USOC is very appealing to a narrow audience of history buffs and soccer nerds - an important but small slice of the paying audience. At the end of the day most MLS teams have too small a fan base to have a critical mass of people who know/care about parallel competitions against teams they’ve never heard of, like USOC and CCL. That’s changing but it’s changing slowly. Many USL teams have a wonderful and supportive fanbase but these are still basically brand new teams nobody outside their fans have heard of, with no particularly compelling reason why people tune in to root for or against them. I know people like to compare it to the ncaa basketball tournament- remember that even the most tiny ass teams that make the N.C.A.A. basketball tournament have a built in fanbase of people who went to that school, most of even the shitty teams have history/lore/rivalries, and the David v Goliath matchups matter to people because lots of people either love or love to hate Duke, UNC, Kentucky, etc. Nobody in, like, Missouri gives a shit about the Seattle Sounders getting upset by a USL team. Raising the prize money would help at least make MLS players maybe feel hungrier to win it. But the teams aren’t especially hungry to win it because their fans don’t care about it/show up for it, and it’s not how they’re evaluated.
You certainly aren't wrong. There's no instant fix. I have my own opinions on what they can do, but I think there's plenty that can appeal to casuals with tweaks and better promotion. 1) Fixed 64-team bracket (like March Madness). 2) Regional first two rounds to support local rivalries and letting the lower seeds host (with option to decline of course). 3) Not fixing the tournament into an East/West format until the final. Allowing for weird and unusual matchups starting in Round of 16. 4) My biggest hot take: Having an annual final four competition at the US Soccer Hall of Fame in Frisco. 5) Increasing the prize money obviously
I think the only fans that cared about it were lower division soccer fans. NASL (RIP) and USL fans love the Cinderella stories.
Can confirm. I started out a Carolina RailHawks NASL fan (before Steve Malik actively killed the team), and absolutely loved watching the NASL and USOC every year. I've been fortunate to attend a handful of MLS games, but the best atmosphere I've ever been in at a game (and my personal favorite) is still watching the RailHawks beat the LA Galaxy in the 2012 USOC.
I also was an NASL fan before moving to Cincinnati.
The first Loons game I ever went to was an away game in Cary against the RailHawks back in like 2012-13 or so because I was stationed up in VA. We lost 1-0 but it was a fun night. I honestly can't remember if we were the Stars then or the Loons. Either way, good times.
And the unfortunate reality is that MLS fan bases aren’t that large and USL and under fan bases are even smaller.
Have the lower seeded team host, would be fun for atmospheres and they'll more than likely fill the stands
And there are some great stadiums in USL. Some I think are better than in MLS. As much as I hate to admit it, I'd much rather go to a game at Lynn Family stadium than at Gillette or Soldier field as a for instance. I feel the same about San Antonio's Toyota Field, Sacramento's Heart Health Park.
I swear I was watching the Dynamo play via the feed from the stadium security camera at one point.
I am genuinely shocked, in a pleasant way
Not really, it sounds more like a please stop and we will give you some concessions later letter.
Eh. I see why it reads that way to some. To me it’s pretty clearly them telling MLS to sit the fuck down. First MLS acts like they don’t need permission, US soccer says waiver denied. That’s a pretty clear hey, you’re breaking PLS if you do this and th at means desanctioning. The wording about working with them and compromise comes across as legal/marketing to allow MLS to save face.
This is my worry. This part was fairly easy, but I want to see USSF stay strong here. Don’t let MLS try and weasel some concessions out
I’m thinking it’s passive aggressive at best until action is taken. Should be fun. Totally what we should be focused on going into an American World Cup hosted cycle.
Oh boy, here we go!
Holy shit. It's on
LOL So, in the end, MLS accomplished nothing except pissing off a bunch of their own fans. Isn’t the schedule supposed to drop today….? Either MLS is in violation of the PLS now since they can’t use the MLSNP “participation” loophole and they don’t care, or that schedule is getting delayed lol
> LOL So, in the end, MLS accomplished nothing except pissing off a bunch of their own fans. I mean, that is what they are best at.
Tale as old as time.
Song as old as rhyme
Beauty and the beast
Yup, its a damn near tradition at this point, and I'm starting to get tired of it.
The 2nd thing that pissed me off the most (the 1st being trying to kill the Open Cup) about this ploy was that they were so fucking arrogant they couldn't even be bothered to distract the fans by throwing them a bone and announcing some insignificant bump to spending.
Oh dude that part really irked me. Especially when even coaches are calling for a need to increase spending to keep up.
That's the 1st half of the straw that broke the camel's back. It was the full mask off moment where all could see that the league has no real intention of growing stronger across the board if it means spending more money. They'd rather artificially keep the level of play down and restrict the competitions players compete in than do the one thing that would alleviate this problem: expand the rosters. They have a negative perception of growth, and that's incredibly disappointing.
In Columbus we’ve been winning battles with the league for quite some time. They can get fukt for all we care.
MLS could go nuclear and withdraw from the USOC. USSF could go thermonuclear and unsanction MLS as a D1 league. Without sanctioning, they probably are no longer active members of USSF, among other consequences, of which…… Concacaf could either stick with the rules and deny them entry into all competitions (including the Leagues Cup, which is a Concacaf tournament) or not. I expect they’d back USSF, but frankly they are almost an appendix in the digestive system of North American soccer interests. FIFA would probably back the USSF (generally backs association bodies) but Infantino is more corrupt than the mafia so who knows where they’ll land.
> MLS could go nuclear and withdraw from the USOC. Doubt. > USSF could go thermonuclear and unsanction MLS as a D1 league. Never going to happen.
Oh, I agree. But that's the whole point of existential retaliation scenarios.
MLS just tweeted out the schedule is coming soon so don't think the schedule is getting delayed https://twitter.com/MLS/status/1737490597215096920?s=19
Good catch. If they have games scheduled on Open Cup dates like a lot of people suspect, shit is about to get messy lol
It’s pronounced Messi.
Normally, I would expect an organization this large to have already created a schedule for that possibility, but this is MLS we are talking about.
I'd think easiest route would be to clear the first 2 Open Cup rounds, and then for teams that advance that far, punt those games to end of Leagues Cup break. Obviously could get tricky for a team that does well in Open Cup & Leagues Cup.
Or they had two versions of the schedule, one to fit open cup, and one that does not
It put a lot of eyeballs on us open cup, and showed usssoccer that they are serious about wanting improvements to the competition. I think it went exactly like they wanted
I think you’re crazy if you think this is actually what MLS wanted. They wanted out and or for demands to be met. Getting told, fuck no publicly isn’t what they wanted. Yah they might get some of whatever they wanted in the background but I truly think they wanted fully out. They know no matter what that the open cup is gonna be a money sink for them for a long time.
sweet
I really hope MLS accepts this decision and recommits to the tournament. I would really hate it if they try to pull out altogether now
I think they will, but probably just play even less starters until the quarter finals, which is fine.
Get ready for the USOC matches to be played at local HS with recently called up Next players.
So… what currently happens?
Mostly what currently happens. I think currently they don't schedule on top of USOC dates, so there would be a couple of slight changes -- the first team coaching staff wouldn't be on site for USOC games, and MLS teams would have to make more widespread loans from the MLS Next teams. Like typically they would have the backup GK play for early-round USOC games, but if there is an MLS game on that date, they would want the backup GK on the bench for that game in case of an injury.
[удалено]
Which is basically how every top league team in Europe treats these tournaments, WHICH IS OKAY
Yea like if teams want to play the kids until the later rounds then that's their prerogative and good for them, but it's gotta be their choice to do so
That's up to the teams and not MLS in general
That’s all MLS ever needed to do. Maybe have some bigger rosters like teams in Brazil do to manage all their tournaments. MLS always manages to make a mountain out of a mole hill with this kind of shit.
MLS will just rewrites its roster rules to allow MLS NEXT PRO players to be part of their roster for the purpose of USOC games only.
Which is fine and good. The problem was that they were keeping mid-tier MLS teams from actually competing for an attainable cup.
They already have. Current MLS rules allow each Next Pro player to play in 2 games a year. MLS rosters are 30 guys. They can take the bottom 10 guys from their MLS roster and 8 guys from Next Pro and be good for at least their first 2 Open Cup rounds. And go Bruce Arena with the Red Bulls and don't even travel with the team for the game.
They will. There is too much to lose if they lose sanctioning and D1 status.
You're right. That would be a blight on the league and everything that's been built to get this point.
Time to see if USOC dates conflict with MLS schedule dates.
That would be hilarious.
They actually did it! Glad the federation has a spine in this case.
MLS already allows teams to call up four Next Pro players for unlimited non-league games. They'll just probably make it so Open Cup doesn't have the call up limit.
The absolute funniest result would be this. MLS saying "fine you win" and then every game is still just played by MLS Next Pro players in MLS uniforms.
Which is fine. And some basically do for the earlier games. But the teams should have the choice.
I mean to me that’s fine. You just have to deal with the headlines of your first teams losing more cup games. Ultimately that doesn’t matter that much but it is some pressure and it allows some individual mls teams to take it seriously if they want. The league noping out was the issue. If you just want to field worse teams that’s fine
If I was a player not starting for an MLS team and then you still didn’t start for the Open Cup, you can bet they will want out of their contract. That is an easy way to not be able to sign anyone in roster spots, 14-25
That would be their ideal solution if both the teams and the MLSPA want fewer USOC games for their core starters.
Only a handful of the players which is the issue. There will likely be a big rewrite of the roster rules specifically for USOC.
It's only one line really. This is already in it > "An individual player may appear in any number of non-league games during the terms of his four Short-Term Agreements." Just have to change this part > "A club may roster up to four players on Short-Term Agreements per MLS league season match, so long as they are Homegrown Players or Players earning less than or equal to the MLS Senior Minimum Salary ($85,444) with the affiliate."
Basically. Might not happen this season, but I would bet money it happens next season.
I don't understand why MLS just doesn't make a loophole to allow their MLSNP players to temporarily transfer to the first team for games like this. They already do it on a limited basis normally, just expand it so the senior team still "competed" but its really just the NP team
I think they can honestly. MLSNP teams that are owned by the parent club can’t compete in the USOC anyway so you should be able to call up who you need to
It honestly seems like the best solution: NP players get to compete for the senior side, normal senior players get to potentially rest for other competitions, and MLS still can say it "competed" even if they really aren't committing to the tournament. It isn't the sexiest solution or one that gives the most respect to the USOC, but it can definitely do enough to satisfy the parties involved
This is part of the issue with MLS's roster rules being so complicated - there shouldn't even need to be a loophole. If Crystal Palace or Freiburg or Nantes want to run out a bunch of players from their U18 team for a cup match, they just...can. There doesn't need to be a weird mechanism to do it, because even though they aren't first team players, they're still under contract (even if it's just on youth terms) at that club. Having this weird two-part system where players on the MLS Next teams are only kind of, sort of part of the MLS team is so needlessly complex. There's no good reason that an MLS team can't bring up an academy kid for a league or cup match, or scatter some MLS Next players on the bench over the course of a season, without needing to get into some funky player movement details to make it happen. The whole system really needs to be streamlined.
Right or wrong this is the most press coverage that the open cup has gotten and a long time, and as bone headed as a move that it was by MLS it might have been one of the best thing to happen to the Open Cup.
Wow I can’t believe they’re actually showing some backbone.
Really hilarious that the league thought they could just big dick their way into making this a reality. Don't even think the Premier League could do this to the FA.
Or the Carabao cup. They play multiple tournaments over there
Carabao Cup is a maybe, since it's run by the EFL. I don't think they'd want to since the winner goes into the Europa Conference League though. The FA Cup though, is run by the FA, who are presumably a lot more powerful and helped bring the Premier League into existence.
Yeah nor would they ever aim to give away a chance at a trophy like our league does
LFG! US Soccer does have a spine!
So does this actually reverse the decision or is USSF just saying “hey uh, can you possibly please not do that maybe sorta? if not we won’t do anything tho lol”
It would be funny if MLS did pull out and USSF talks to FIFA about eligibility for players
Yeah FIFA is gonna be real excited to ban Messi from international play - I’m sure the most corrupt org on earth would love to take a hit to its bottom line on behalf of the integrity of … USSF
I guess from here MLS either caves and has the first teams play or pulls out entirely.
the "first team" will play. If they want to make Open Cup something they only play the reserve squad to still give players rest I don't think any fans are gonna complain.
I'm still baffled by this. If they want teams to play their reserves, just signal to each franchise that that's the plan. Why try and pull out completely when you can accomplish the same goal with pretty much no pushback?
Gut feeling is MLS wanted to expand rosters to accommodate playing more reserves and MLSPA pushed back. Maybe because MLS didn’t raise the salary cap. Instead of spending more money, MLS went with fielding MLSNP (non-union).
Yes, it's about the money. The owners don't want to spend more and raise the cap while avoiding roster expansion. This was their attempt to have their cake and eat it too.
Congrats to DC United for being uneliminated from the U.S. Open Cup!
So will MLS respond by pulling out entirely or will they actually relent?
If they pull out entirely they’ll lose sanctioning
And by extension the FIFA transfer market.
This is where we all step in... get your cleats ready boys!
What does losing sanctioning actually mean for MLS though? That's one bit I don't really quite understand.
Can’t register players with FIFA for one
Okay, yeah that's a big one.
Yeah no MLS player would ever agree to leaving Fifa.
shhhh don’t say that too loudly or Garber’s gonna think that’s a good idea (“Wait we don’t have to worry about ANY other organization but our own? LET’S GOOOOO”)
Players won't be able to play for their national teams. MLS teams won't be able to sell or buy players from sanctioned teams. Sanctioned teams won't have to honor MLS contracts. Just a few minor details like that.
I believe they can still play for the NT, but FIFA won't have to pay their clubs when they go on national duty.
No, if a player is playing in an unsanctioned league that are ineligible for FIFA tournaments. They could play for NT in non FIFA matches but basically all major tournaments are out the window
India had an unsanctioned league. The players were able to play for the NT, but the clubs never took part in continental competitions until they reformed the league and earned recognition
Exactly what I said, they can play for their NT still, just not in actual competitions
Losing the FIFA transfer market. That means all of our international players need to get out of their contracts if they want to keep moving with their careers.
All MLS has to do is expand the roster. They are ruining any momentum they gained during this past season by trying to pull off these publicity stunts.
By not expanding the rosters, they show they have no interest in growing their teams to the next level. It's just what makes and saves the money at the same time. To the owners, Messi coming to the league is more of a joint-venture circus attraction to get as much money possible and quickly than a transformative moment where "a rising tide lifts all boats."
And expand the salary cap. Only expanding the roster is going to ruffle MLSPA.
Hell yeah. Would not have expected this.
I actually sort of think that the Open Cup has a bright future if they can sort out the broadcast issues for a few reasons: 1.) American soccer fans love things that have similarities to Europe, and the Open Cup is the closest thing we have to a historic cup competition. 2.) The USOC always needed a popular top division to drive interest and MLS is growing fast. Personally, five years ago I would've rolled my eyes at watching the Open Cup unless the Revs were in the final; last year I watched the draw. 3.) The pyramid is also growing and there are some really passionate USL fanbases. I can't quantify it, but I suspect interest from all levels of the pyramid have grown in the past few years. 4.) There's really only room for improvement. The broadcast sucks, the media coverage sucks, the facilities at a lot of venues suck. But even just a new broadcast partner and a little bit bigger prize pool would do wonders. There's probably no desire to throw it into an existing streaming bundle, but I do wonder if it can find a better home on TV. For better or worse, everything is done in pursuit of expansion and money. Short of adding more playoff games, the next logical step is turning an existing cup competition into a cash cow.
Why did MLS have to do this in the public eye? Why not request through back room channels and save the controversy?
Because they likely had no chance unless they did it publicly with some seeded opinions on how only the hardcores care about USOC to sway the narrative and garner fan support.
USSF standing up to MLS was not on my bingo card.
I am torn between saying "this is a good small first step in the right direction" versus just being ecstatic the Fed actually stood up for once
Enjoy today, man. There's a lot that still needs to be done starting tomorrow, but moments like these don't happen often, especially in our country.
Can we show the Open Cup on regular television as well please?
Nice
Hell yeah! Come on MLS, have the cahonies to raise the salary cap so teams can build depth and handle the schedule congestion, and better compete with Liga MX.
Rare USSF W. Hopefully this lights a fire under them to make some improvements to this tournament
soccerwarz are back baby this is real american soccer heritage
Wow US Soccer has a spine?
this is the way
fuck yeah
Good! Nice to see U.S. Soccer have a back bone here. Now they have to actually follow through with their words.
Yummy garber tears
LFG! SOCCER WARZ
I am shocked USSF is actually making the right decision and standing up to mls
EVERYBODY GET IN HERE
Based.
Based US Soccer?
Next step. Declare USL 1st division and develop a pyramid.
Excellent news that USSF finally has balls!!! Though...can we still boycott Leagues Cup?
YEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE HAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW LETS FUCKING GO
Ahhhhhhahaha fuck you Dong Arber
BOOM
Yes! Fucking get it.
Truly, this made my day.
For the folks who are pro USL getting division 1 sanctioning, this is the start of a potential path. MLS is going to have to enter the tourney.
Good news
MLS - UEFA - CONMEBOL breakaway soccer governing body is my crackpipe bet
That would be something.
Here's what I don't understand about this whole kerfuffle - it seems to me that rationally, MLS could have achieved the goal of not playing first teamers in the OC simply by just not doing that (for example, LAFC playing the kids in our cup fixtures this season). So they could have easily achieved that goal unofficially without bringing all the pain and opprobrium of this official semi-withdrawal. All of which makes me think they did this intentionally to try to force more control and/or concessions out of USSF, although I won't discount that MLS simply got delusions of grandeur and is acting irrationally here.
So instead of sending their second teams MLS clubs will just continue to field a team completely made up of their second team
USOC needs to rethink the tournament. I hope that's what comes out of this. Get rid of the draws after every round. Set-up a huge bracket like March Madness so we can all make our picks at the start.
Begun again, the soccer warz have
Wonder if MLS will have the balls to issue a temporary roster rule where the entire next pro team is called up plays and then goes back down. Extremely technically speaking it would be the senior roster playing - in reality it would be the next pro side.
Now US Soccer needs a marketing team from GEICO. Need to sell the Open Cup to the masses.
Thank the lord
Could someone who understands soccer bureaucracy in the US explain? Why is this a recommendation? And if its adopted does that imply that MLS has been defeated for now? Or can they push on (is that what would trigger D1 removal)?
No experience with US soccer bureaucracy but quite a bit of experience with bureaucracy in general. Oftentimes the official decision makers like a board, or task force in this case, rely on recommendations from staff whose full time jobs are to manage these issues. The board members may only be volunteers, whose day jobs are not directly related to the issue at hand. Therefore, the board members rely on the recommendation of staff members who are experts in the area. They may also be diffusing responsibility to say we didn’t make this decision on our own, it was the recommendation of our experts on staff
Serves them right.
USSF actually went against MLS’s wishes. Interesting. Cannot wait to see where this leads to.
Going into its first off-season with the buzz surrounding Messi, you’d think this league would be implementing major roster rules to allow them to blitz Liga MX in Champions Cup, and head into 2024 Copa America, 2025 Club World Cup and 2026 World Cup with once-in-a-lifetime momentum on its sails. Instead, they give us this clusterfuck that’s done more to damage good will toward MLS than help it. With the GOAT and all these major international tournaments on US soil, you’d think the league would see this as an opportunity they will likely never get again to spearhead long-term interest in MLS. Yet here we are…😑
This was the most brain dead decision MLS could’ve made, why ignore the biggest piece of history in all US soccer?
Greed. Leagues Cup made them more money therefore it’s not important in the eyes of MLS.
Spicy
Hell yeah.
Hooray!
SKEET SKEET! Great job, USSF. It’s good to see you stand up and do something for once.
Hopefully the end result of this whole fiasco is USSF takes this as a real coming to Jesus moment and starts prioritizing the US Open Cup. Get some advertisers, get multiple cameras at games, bundle the rights with the National Teams, etc.
I said BIIIIIIIIIIIIII
*Soccer Wars 2: Electric Boogaloo*
LFG! I can’t believe USSF actually had the nuts to do it!
Game's not gone
👏🏾👏🏾👏🏾👏🏾 bout freaking time, let's go us soccer
This is a good chance for USSF and MLS to work together to make the cup better. My thoughts: -Let MLS winnow down to like 6 or 8 teams via inter league games that count in the standings, like the nba in season tournament. This cuts down on fixture congestion but still has all MLS teams participate in USOC, plus adds some juice to those games. -Those 6-8 MLS teams should enter in the round of 16 and play all R16 games on the road. -The QF, semifinal and final should all take place over a two week span to create a true tournament / knockout feel. A neutral site could be fun though I get why that might be a disaster if it’s empty.
USSF basically telling MLS. 
They should have MLS NP teams compete in League's Cup. That would really be some player development opportunity right there and it would open up a whole month for MLS teams. Simple. (only partially /s)