Top Stories

NASL claims proposed U.S. Soccer rules prevent league from attaining Division I status

NASLLogo

By RYAN TOLMICH

As the league continues to grow, the NASL now looks set to go up against U.S. Soccer in pursuit of Division I sanctioning.

The Financial Times reported Monday that the NASL believes proposed rule changes by U.S. Soccer are blocking the league’s ability to achieve D1 status. In a letter, NASL alleges U.S. Soccer has protected MLS’ status because the federation would be able to benefit from several joint business transactions.

Under the proposed changes, a league would need 16 teams, up from 12 under 2014 rules, to acquire D1 sanctioning. In addition, 75 percent of a league’s teams must be based in cities with a population of more than 2 million people, up from 1 million, while stadiums would be required to meet a minimum 15,000-seat capacity for the entire league to qualify for Division I.

With regards to that stadium requirement, only two current stadiums, Ottawa Fury FC’s TD Place Stadium and the Fort Lauderdale Strikers’ Lockhart Stadium, would meet the criteria.

“Doubling the population criteria now is an anti-competitive bait and switch, with the purpose of entrenching MLS’s monopoly position at the very time when the NASL is threatening to become a significant competitor,” Jeffrey Kessler, an antitrust and sports attorney representing NASL, wrote in a letter to U.S. Soccer president Sunil Gulati.

“The financial damage is significant,” Mr. Kessler told the Financial Times. “Simply put, the actions by U.S. Soccer are hindering the league’s earnings potential with advertisers, broadcasters and other business partners, who will pay top dollar only for Division I, regardless of the quality of play or passion of the fans.”

The NASL went on to claim that second-division sanctioning causes difficulties in securing accesses to world-class tournaments and refereeing, while also proving to be a deterrent in adding top players and owners.

Founded in 2009, the NASL currently features 11 teams with two more, Miami FC and Puerto Rico FC, set to join in 2016.

What do you think of the allegations? Where do you see NASL on the soccer pyramid?

Share your thoughts below.

Comments

  1. There isn’t a SINGLE thing here that says NASL or the Cosmos are for promotion and relegation. They don’t. They want to be a first division. Nothing about promotion or relegation.

    Reply
  2. My concern with the proposed population standard is neither for or against MLS or NASL. It is for any city in these great United States of America not already a part of these leagues to have a shot at joining the big leagues. If this kind of thing existed in the NBA, Oklahoma City might never have been allowed to relocate the SuperSonics despite selling out an Oklahoma women’s game in Norman, Bedlam in Stillwater, and a Katrina-displaces Hornets (now Pelicans) team all on the same night in order to seal a profession of faith in our major league viability for David Sterm. With Oklahoma City growing its public-at-large soccer sense in short order from a youth development and supporter base that has existed for decades, we are suddenly in danger of never seeing MLS thanks to bigger city expansion targeting that could occur from the population standard proposed.

    Call me silly, but is Aubrey McClendon suddenly not qualified from being a future investor of a major league hometown team? What about Harold Hamm? Because these entrepreneurs live and invest in a city under 2 million in the MSA? Among the current Oklahoma City Energy FC ownership, we have some heavyweights who have no problems proposing and developing a downtown soccer stadium on the current Cox Convention Center site, which is set to be replaced by a new convention center in the coming years. Soccer is complementary to the major professional sports schedule in Oklahoma City, and yet, for population limits that are under consideration as a future standard, we might never be considered for the dance. I’m sorry, but that is the definition of anti-trust, not which league gets to dance as the designated top tier.

    That said, I’m sure USSF will drop the population standard before the final standard is adopted, because cooler heads have prevailed in our growth via USSF throughout the decades. There are plenty of minnow cities throughout the world that somehow put together a top-notch team, and while Oklahoma City is no minnow, we or someone like us belong in the big show at some point down the line. No court in the nation will ignore this international truth upon proper review.

    I firmly believe MLS will be at 32 teams by Year 50 with worldwide acclaim, much like the NBA was the world’s basketball powerhouse with international marketing acclaim in its 50th season. I’m just saying we deserve a shot to be in the 28-32 team version of MLS. That is all.

    Thanks for allowing me to post a contribution!

    Eddy Hrdlicka
    The Voice of Oklahoma City University Soccer Play-by-Play (2013-present)

    Reply
  3. Losing NASL teams that are doing well for themselves would not be a positive thing for US soccer, nor is making USL an MLS farm league, which is a good thing for MLS ownership cartel only.

    MLS, minor league by world standards and USL, a minor leagues minor league. If that is the future, U.S. will not win a WC in our lifetime. We won’t get close.

    Is MLB still the only major sport with an anti-trust exemption? I think so. Maybe NFL? Not sure. But they would be the only ones. MLS does not have an anti-trust exemption from Congress, and they shouldn’t get one. What they’re doing with USSF/USL is anti-competitive and NASL has every right to legal action.

    Reply
  4. For some good background to the NASL’s desire to sue the MLS, you should read this article:http://www.miaminewtimes.com/news/aaron-davidsons-stunning-soccer-bribery-case-could-clean-up-fifas-corruption-7862564.

    It pretty much sums up the genesis of the NASL conceived by now alleged crooks liars and thieves, who are/were up to their eyeballs in the FIFA scandal. This is not disparage owners of other teams in the NASL, but, as a very unstable league, it seems that they are grasping at straws and it sounds like the NASL is looking for some “go-away” money or a settlement from the MLS as a sort of revenue stream. What is not mentioned by the USSF or the NASL or the MLS is that the USL has also submitted an application to become a Division 2 soccer league, who will seem to be the big winners if the NASL succeeds into establishing itself as a Division I teams (unlikely) or folds (more likely).

    The NASL does not really have a long term strategy for it’s existence. instead putting it’s eggs into the promotion/relegation basket. Hoping that they can get into the MLS through the backdoor promotion, waive off a franchise fee and tap into the lucrative MLS revenue stream and at the same time, relegate a former franchisee, who has paid millions of dollars in those same fees and watch his equity in his team disappear. The MLS will not allow this to happen, and most likely neither will the USSF or the US court system. The USSF has a duty too. It has to protect its members, and it’s biggest assets, Division I soccer, which happens to the MLS, through rules and regulations. If they put Division I to a higher standard than what exists now, so what?, Their duty has never included relief , monetary or administrative to lower division to end around to a higher division.

    The Division 2 conundrum is not only a problem for the USSF. Right now almost ALL of the teams if the English FA Championship (Div.2)are losing money. The last television rights contract was LESS than the previous one and is dwarfed by the Behemoth EPL rights fees and because of draconian work permit rules, English born footballers, whom the 2nd division was supposed to be used to promote into to the Premiership, are so expensive, as well as loanees from the EPL teams that many Championship sides are saddled with payroll roster debt, and they will continue to lose money until things change or most are sold off or go into receivership.Those luck teams that get promoted use their EPL moneys to paydown accumulted desbt instead of buting higher quality players, further diminishing their chance to stay in the EPL.

    The NASL need to establish it goals independent of being a second Division One team, only then can they find a plan to establish their viability

    Reply
    • bottlcaps, interesting comments!

      – “USL has also submitted an application to become a Division 2 soccer league” – the fruit of mls/usl partnership, yes?

      – “if the NASL succeeds into establishing itself as a Division I teams (unlikely) or folds (more likely)” – another person suggested a merger, as in afl/nfl of 1970, and i wonder if this isn’t also a third realistic possibility?

      – nasl “Hoping that they can get into the MLS through the backdoor promotion” – am i missing something? in this recent sbi article, it seems to be nasl/npsl pro/rel, not nasl/mls:

      NASL, NPSL officials in discussions to gauge feasibility of implementing promotion-relegation system
      http://www.sbisoccer.com/2015/08/discussions-feasibility-implementing.html

      who is saying that nasl wants pro/rel with mls?

      Reply
  5. Agree with the comments that I don’t see anything nasl would bring to the table for promoting soccer in the US that MLS isn’t already doing? The nasl is a minor league, no academies developing young talent like MLS, no DPs giving some extra fan interest, college draft players will always prefer to go to MLS, players get paid more in MLS, they have the national TV contracts, etc. etc…

    No need for 2 Div 1 leagues, it would just cannibalize the product and revenues. Plus, the NASL can’t even beat USL teams in the open cup, so they should be more worried about raising their playing level!

    Reply
    • but jimmy k, isn’t it a bit of a ‘catch 22’ situation? meaning, yes, nasl level of play is lower than mls. but isn’t that – at least in part – due to nasl being lower division? i pointed out in my comment that d1 league gets first choice of players in college draft. and nasl’s attorney tells us that not having d1 restricts nasl’s earnings from tv contracts, etc.

      “The financial damage is significant,” Mr. Kessler told the Financial Times. “Simply put, the actions by U.S. Soccer are hindering the league’s earnings potential with advertisers, broadcasters and other business partners, who will pay top dollar only for Division I, regardless of the quality of play or passion of the fans.”

      if nasl had d1, it would get some of the top players out of college every year, and also get bigger/better tv contracts.

      not saying nasl would be as big as mls, but it would probably be a whole lot bigger than it is now if it had all of the d1 advantages. so it’s like a ‘catch 22’. see?

      Reply
  6. You tell ’em , Slow Left Arm!

    We are a gangsta monopoly!

    M.O.B, baby!

    It’s not about reality, it’s all about my salary!
    Gangsta! Gangsta!

    Me and Sunil-zo ridinz’ in a Benzo!

    One ruling order! Do as I say or I drop you, month fo!

    Reply
  7. i’m honestly getting annoyed with this MLS v. NASL thing. get everyone in a room and figure it out. we cannot have two D1 leagues. it doesn’t work like that in sports. i can’t listen to whining anymore.

    Reply
  8. I never get the need for soccer to artificially demote. Whether it is pro/rel or US soccer putting Div. Makes no sense.

    If it is because there are spots determined in CCL, ok crazy to think that NASL woul d

    Reply
    • have more spots than USL, when USL beat them head to head or MLS.

      But to tell there fan base, hey here is minor league soccer, which is a minor league feeder sytem to noone? Why?

      Get rid of the division status. No need for the naming demotion of teams and leagues.

      This is America (cue America the Beautiful music)…there is no need for classes. All team are created equal.

      Reply
  9. i read everyone’s posts, above. my thoughts:

    – what does D1 mean,exactly? i am guessing that you are right, jeff madsen. D1 winner probably represents USSF at international D1 tournaments.

    also, the player draft. in the past, it appeared to me that mls college draft concluded first. then, usl draft began (i don’t recall about nasl). therefore, in a very real and practical way imo, regardless of what anyone says, this makes mls “higher” than usl. just for the simple fact (if it’s correct) that mls draft gets all the best players and usl draft gets what’s left over (no offense to those guys intended). do maybe, mls/d1 draft is first, nasl/d2 draft is second and usl/d3 draft is third? not to say that the college draft is the only way that teams get their good players.

    also, imo this mechanism, once in place, tends to create the ‘self-fulfilling profecy’ (did i spell that right?). once your league is labeled d2 or d3, and then mls/d1 grabs all the best players in the next draft, and you get the (no offense) no-so-good left over players, then how will you ever become as good as mls/d1? you’re ‘stuck’ imo. see?

    – if i’m mls, i’m doing everything i can to squash the pesty nasl. if i’m nasl, i’m doing everything i can to get d1 recognition. that’s politics, for ya.

    – how is nasl helping soccer? well, remember those recent collective bargaining agreement negotiations with mls players? they wanted free agency. and recently nasl stated they would like pro/rel (even if it’s a ways off in the future) and mls always said it’s not compatible with their systerm.

    so imo if nasl gets d1 recognition from ussf, then if i’m an mls player and my wife and i live in a city with a nasl team, and our kids to go schools in that city, then (even if dad had to take a pay cut althought not necessarily always true) dad might want to quit his mls club and play for nasl club instead (“free agency”; in mls, cities choose players, players do not choose cities). in theory nasl could also have pro/rel. if this all were to get out of hand (a little far fetched, do you agree?) it might pose a threat to the mls system. and we can’t have that, so it’s don garber/ussf/sum bug-squashing time, yes?

    – the standard for d1 should go up – i think this is the best argument. nasl had d1, yes? it gave it up in 1985 when it folded the league, yes? mls launched in 1996, yes? so now mls has the d1 that nasl used to have. i mean, you make your choices, you live with the consequences, yes? maybe now nasl wishes it hadn’t folded the league back then, maybe it would still have it’s d1 now?

    but anyway, yes, a lot of years have passed, and places like seattle and portland are setting a new crazy standard. if nasl doesn’t get d1, imo this is the best reason why.

    Reply
  10. This could be viewed by the DOJ as anti-competitive behavior on the part of the USSF to the benifit of MLS. Yes, the whole “USSF and MLS are colluding to monopolize division 1 status” argument was a part of Fraser v. Major League Soccer, but the context was very different.

    Reply
  11. MLS owners are as stupid as the NFL owners in the 50s who resisted putting games on TV because they thought it would cost them ticket revenue.

    Pro/Rel would make domestic soccer so much more popular in this country. Until they do I’ll just keep seeing more and more kids in this country buy Barca and Arsenal jerseys while not even knowing where the nearest MLS team is.

    Reply
    • Be honest Pablito…… what % of those fans wearing Barcelona jerseys even know….. have even the slightest idea which teams were promoted and relegated in La Liga last year? More than likely, they couldn’t name the teams in the lower half of the table.

      Reply
  12. I’m all for the growth of soccer in America but what is the NASL doing to contribute to the sport in this country that MLS isn’t? Is there something I’m missing here?

    Reply
    • And who/what is actually preventing NASL from becoming the “first division.” If their whole schtick is that they are better because they are “open,” then they should exercise the freedom that being open gives them, buy great players, become better than MLS, and then claim the status.

      Reply
  13. Listen, Mutha phukkers.

    I am the Don and I will stop all competition.

    I will stomp it out.

    I am gangsta!

    I am the Suge Knight of MLS and the NASL is droppin’ like Tipca.

    ‘Cause I’m the kinda Garber that’s built to last
    If you mess with me, I stick a foot in yo ass!

    Reply
  14. This makes a lot of sense from the NASL. MLS owners have huge amounts of money in investment and NASL D1 recognition would create an NBA/ABA type of situation and no MLS owner would want to lose the D1 status. It is a big issue because the NASL is bound to be as big as the MLS due to the simple fact that they are in markets that MLS is not. USFF is playing favorites, maybe it’s time for MLS put out a plan to absorb teams to reach 30 and the rest NASL teams can be in the D2.

    Reply
    • I would like to know – what exactly does it mean to be “Division 1”?

      For example, does this mean that if there is an international cup that invites the winner of the “the league” from each country, that we would be eligible to send 2 team?

      What sort of legal or UEFA implications does this mean?

      Reply
      • No one knows since no other country has two division one leagues and the US won’t either because it’s stupid.

      • Here in Brazil we have 4 divisions, the first three have twenty clubs in each. The four worst from A down to B and the four worst in B descend into the C and the four worst in C descend into the D. The D division is made up of groups. The four best clubs rise to the division above. Here we not have leagues, the clubs are affiliated state federations which are in turn affiliated to CBF. Before the Brazilian league (The Brasileirão, where 12 teams have real chances of being champion), we have the state championships where the greatest glory is tradition.

  15. Could these new standards impact MLS expansion? Would this be a reason to favor Miami over Sacramento, and would SLC get into the league at this time? Even is adding a smaller market team didn’t push MLS below the 75% mark, would the league want to stay away from smaller markets so as not to get anywhere near the minimum?

    Also, what if you had a city with 3.5 million, could you put two teams there?

    Reply
  16. The further one looks into the relationship between USSF/MLS/SUM the murkier and seedier it seems. Everything comes back to pro/rel. Currently, the system is rigged to benefit the few. USSF needs an independent board and it needs to publish guidelines to an open-entry Division One. The population requirement is ludicrous. The stadium and size requirements not so much. Publish the guidelines, give a long time line to their implementation in the US/Canada, and open Division One and the pyramid within 15-20 years. The game would explode in popularity.

    Reply
    • “Publish the guidelines, give a long time line to their implementation in the US/Canada, and open Division One and the pyramid within 15-20 years. The game would explode in popularity.”

      Lol, yup, that’s exactly what the average American sports fan is waiting for in order to support soccer, an open Div 1 and pyramid.

      Reply
    • The overwhelming majority have leagues organized under a national federation in a vertical integrated system. Therefore there is no need for two division 1 leagues

      Reply
    • status quo have shoved an american system down our thoats. Well guess what, there are 2 div one in baseball right? American & National. Something different happens in the NFL, Right?

      when it comes to put other leagues down, they are ok using soccer culture divisional status, yet there is no p/r which is what gives div status meaning.

      why couldn’t we have 2 div ones just like baseball have? after all they LOVE their american way

      Reply
      • MLB is one big top flight. It may be split into leagues for historical reasons but it is entirely integrated – i.e. there are no longer AL and NL umpires like there used to be, no AL and NL presidents. Even baseball realized that’s dumb. Why should we create a foolish system from scratch?

      • What are you talking about? What European country has two Division 1s? MLS is the top flight, always will be, and eventually there will be pro/rel but not when the second division is a basketcase like NASL.

  17. Call me selfish, but i would rather have 1 strong D1 league than two that compete and take from each other. A strong second division already can compete somewhat with MLS and complement as well.

    Reply
  18. So, the D2 league that’s in jeopardy of becoming the D3 league is complaining about not being eligible to become the D1 league? Riiiiiight.

    Reply
  19. MLS = SUM
    SUM = USSF
    USSF = MLS

    Pack your bags, NASL. You can’t win this. The fix is in.

    Winning this in court will require money you don’t have

    Reply
    • I think the NASL is positioning itself to have leverage against the USSF and ensure its sole selection as Div 2. NASL knows the landscape is too heavily sided to MLS for them to compete to be Div 1. It’s either that or the commissioner has been getting an earful from the Cosmos ownership.

      In the end, NASL’s worst case scenarion is saying, “Hey USSF, USL stays tier 3, we are tier 2, and we drop the lawsuit.” They neutralize the threat from USL and solidify their position long enough to continue growing with quality ownership groups, quality of play, and expansion westward.

      Reply
  20. I think those population requirements are ridiculous. By those standards all of the European leagues couldn’t be considered division 1. The population rule would also prevent promotion and relegation from ever happening because there is no way to control which teams will earn a spot in the top tier. The stadium requirements do make sense however.

    Reply
    • Yup. Whether you are pro/anti MLS or pro/anti NASL it is hard to disagree with Kessler. These rules-changes seem to be specifically aimed at screwing with the NASL. You can argue that this doesn’t matter because NASL had little chance anyway of becoming Div. 1, but that’s beside the point.

      Reply
      • It’s pretty easy to disagree with Kessler. As soccer grows in this country, the standards for what constitutes “Div. 1” should increase. That’s not part of an anti-NASL conspiracy, it’s simple progress.

        I guess I would like more information on what is considered a team based in a city with a population of at least 2 million. Is RBNY based in NYC, or the Chicago Fire based in Chicago? Are the Cosmos a NYC team or a Hempstead team? And is the 2 million figure the actual city population, or the population of the metropolitan area?

        This sounds like the groundwork for an anti-trust lawsuit against USSF/MLS, which maybe is the NASL’s endgame. But I’m pretty sure going to a civil court violates FIFA regulations.

        NASL’s problem is that, despite their claim to being big-time, they’re minor league. There’s nothing wrong with that, but they’ld be better off accepting their fate and trying to be the best 2nd division possible. If they truly were Division 1, they wouldn’t blink an eye at these new standards.

      • It wouldn’t be as fishy if NASL hadn’t of filed, been put on hold, then the USSF board which happens to have a load of current and former MLS people all of sudden decided that now was the time for change, and change just big enough to block NASL. Again, I don’t think NASL is delusional enough to think they can overtake MLS, I just think they want leverage to get a seat at the USSF table and promote whats best for soccer in the US, not just soccer in MLS.

      • “promote what’s best for soccer in the US”? Let’s be real, the NASL is about what is best for soccer in the NASL, not what’s best for soccer in the US.

      • Regardless of the NASL’s interests, monopoly’s in any avenue of business haven’t ever been a good thing.

        Competition is always healthy and always benefits the consumer.

      • Agreed. This is all about money and has virtually nothing to do with promoting the game in the best interests of soccer.

        The NASL is trying to shortcut what it means to be Division 1 to gain the perception of major league and hence their apparent value to uninformed third parties.

        The NASL needs to tread very carefully if it wants to go down this path. Be careful what you wish for. Suing the USSF will not be thought of kindly by FIFA and do they really want an open full on competition in markets with MLS?

    • Would even MLS comply with these ridiculous population requirements? Certainly, none of European or South American leagues would. However, it is perfectly fine to include Canadian teams in the first division of US soccer, lol. I am glad that NASL has the balls to speak up.

      Reply

Leave a Comment