The Revs bring a 1-0 lead into the second half against Columbus in a win-and-in situation. Beautiful goal by Agudelo, though the team's looked shaky at times in the first half.
MLS 2013 -- Deuces Wild
- Thread starter Titans Bastard
- Start date
Playoffs!
4th place at least, maybe 3rd if Chicago doesn't win. A NY-CHI tie would ideal because would cement Montreal's epic collapse, prevent NY from winning a trophy, and still leave 3rd for the Revs.
4th place at least, maybe 3rd if Chicago doesn't win. A NY-CHI tie would ideal because would cement Montreal's epic collapse, prevent NY from winning a trophy, and still leave 3rd for the Revs.
Golazos for NY from Thierry Henry and Lloyd Sam. NY up 3-1 now, surely they can't blow this....?
Magee scored for Chicago, his 21st, so the Golden Boot is his unless Camilo can score two later tonight.
Montreal can breathe easier, it looks like the Fire are the odd man out in the East now.
Edit: From BigSoccer:
Magee scored for Chicago, his 21st, so the Golden Boot is his unless Camilo can score two later tonight.
Montreal can breathe easier, it looks like the Fire are the odd man out in the East now.
Edit: From BigSoccer:
5-2 FT. NYRB wins the Supporters Shield, finally getting a trophy after 18 years.
East:
(1)NY vs. (4/5)Houston/Montreal
(2)KC vs. (3)New England
West:
(1)Portland vs. (4/5)
(2)Salt Lake vs. (3)
LA, Seattle, and Colorado have locked up 3,4, and 5 but the order depends on tonight's games.
East:
(1)NY vs. (4/5)Houston/Montreal
(2)KC vs. (3)New England
West:
(1)Portland vs. (4/5)
(2)Salt Lake vs. (3)
LA, Seattle, and Colorado have locked up 3,4, and 5 but the order depends on tonight's games.
Wednesday October 30:
Seattle Hosts Colorado
10:30pm Eastern time
Thursday October 31:
Houston hosts Montreal
8:00pm Eastern time
Portland will be at Seattle/Colorado on Saturday November 2nd at 10:30 eastern (on NBC Sports),
I'm not sure of the exact timing of the other games.
Edit: Titans Bastard already said the matchups
Seattle Hosts Colorado
10:30pm Eastern time
Thursday October 31:
Houston hosts Montreal
8:00pm Eastern time
Portland will be at Seattle/Colorado on Saturday November 2nd at 10:30 eastern (on NBC Sports),
I'm not sure of the exact timing of the other games.
Edit: Titans Bastard already said the matchups
I'm very excited to see the Revs back in the playoffs. I was young, but I actually went to the 2004 MLS Cup at Gillette Stadium. I'm definitely ready for some high-action soccer.
Seattle won 2-0 last night so they move on to face Portland. However Gspurning got a red card for handling the ball outside the box so he's out for the first leg (Saturday) against Portland.
Titans Bastard said:
And Frank Yallop is in for Chicago. That was quick. He apparently turned down an approach from (his hometown) Vancouver. Yallop was very successful in his first stint in San Jose, and his second was pretty mediocre outside of an outstanding 2012 season. If I were a Fire fan, I'd be a little wary that Yallop is one of those old-guard coaches who will struggle to keep with the league as it evolves.
10 pm eastern time on NBC Sports, the Sounders and Timbers play the first leg of their playoff. Almost 1,200 timbers fans are making the trip.
The first leg of the 4th pairing in the conference semifinals is just getting underway with RSL in LA.
The Revolution go on the road to KC with a 1 goal advantage.
The Timbers head home with a 1 goal advantage.
Houston and NY go back to NY all square.
It's only a few minutes in by LA has the better run of form so far.
Lamar Neagle is suspended for the leg at Portland due to a second yellow in the playoffs.
The Revolution go on the road to KC with a 1 goal advantage.
The Timbers head home with a 1 goal advantage.
Houston and NY go back to NY all square.
It's only a few minutes in by LA has the better run of form so far.
Lamar Neagle is suspended for the leg at Portland due to a second yellow in the playoffs.
A 2-1 result was decent for the Revs, although it's a shame they conceded because 2-0 would have been infinitely better. I think a draw in KC is the best case scenario and a 1 goal loss is more likely. KC are still favorites in my book.
I've found Houston to be playing some surprisingly good soccer at times for a team that has historically played Kinnear's rather boring but effective style. But who knew Rico Clark could execute slick backheels?
Anyway, Seattle is dead in the water against Portland, but the other three matchups are totally up in the air.
I've found Houston to be playing some surprisingly good soccer at times for a team that has historically played Kinnear's rather boring but effective style. But who knew Rico Clark could execute slick backheels?
Anyway, Seattle is dead in the water against Portland, but the other three matchups are totally up in the air.
I'm not so confident. Seattle will come out fighting, I'm actually a little worries for the Timbers players safety (particularly if the Timbers get a quick goal). Sigi will be coaching for his job.Titans Bastard said:
However it is true that Portland has not lost at home since early March, and has not been scored on in 6 games (and the Timbers have scored 8 over that time), but I;m still going to be a nervous wreck all week.
Will the revs game be televised around Boston? Looks like csnne has the Celtics then only a half hour block later.
saintnick912 said:
The game is on CSNNE's alternate channel and joined in progress by the main channel, which is unfortunate. It seems like most cable providers have it. I don't have a TV, so I was always going to watch it on MLS Live.
daburgaman said:
There's a reason why the Revolution aren't exactly among the most respected franchises in the league.
Gregg Berhalter has been named coach and sporting director of the Crew, replacing interim manager Brian Bliss, who took over after Robert Warzycha got canned.
Berhalter himself just got fired after a season and a half at Hammarby, when it became clear that the club was going to miss out on promotion back to the Allsvenskan for a second time under Berhalter's reign. So the Crew are giving him not just the coaching job, but full control over all player acquisition....because Europe, I guess.
Berhalter himself just got fired after a season and a half at Hammarby, when it became clear that the club was going to miss out on promotion back to the Allsvenskan for a second time under Berhalter's reign. So the Crew are giving him not just the coaching job, but full control over all player acquisition....because Europe, I guess.
NY - Houston is 1-1 and heading to extra time. KC just went up 1-0 on New England after knocking on the door for the entire first half. NE is going to have to step up their game to not concede another couple of goals before the game is over.
Titans Bastard said:
No away goals rule in MLS, so both matches are completely knotted up right now.
Very chippy match so far, and yeah, the Revs simply have to do better.
Billy R Ford said:
Houston up on a sloppy goal from Omar Cummings. Second extra time period now.
NE's lack of a real quality DM is a big part of what's keeping the team from the upper echelons. The team needs a little more depth, too. Guys like Imbongo and Barnes are going to limit you; the loss of Sène and Tierney/Alston is hurting right now.
Titans Bastard said:
Of course, Imbongo scores the equalizer on a nice side-volley....
The midfield has been improved since Caldwell came in for Dorman.
So random question from someone that knows nothing about soccer - how much better is the average EPL team than the average MLS team? Is it MLB/AAA difference? Closer? Would the best MLS team hang with an EPL team?
I guess my question is how good is the league?
I guess my question is how good is the league?
This is one of those things that gets debated ad nauseum. You'll get a thousand different answers. It's certainly a step below what the best of the EPL has to offer. It'd be considered an upset if even a relegation team lost to an MLS side, but it probably would happen from time to time.The Napkin said:
It's really hard to compare, the style is quite different. IMO, teams don't hold their shape nearly as we'll in MLS and players are more stop/start. It's all kind of spastic and tends to lack the fluidity you might see in Europe .
Oof at that goal. Revs are going to have a lot of regrets about missed opportunities after this one
Agudelo with a gorgeous touch in the box and almost scores, and then Reis makes one of the worst decisions you'll see out of the back. He's had an amazing game overall, but that's a brutal throw.
The conventional wisdom is that the best MLS clubs can hang with anybody but the very best of the top leagues in a one-off, but would likely struggle over a whole season due to less depth.The Napkin said:
The Napkin said:
I think MLS is roughly Championship level, but as others have said it's not an apples to apples comparison. Historically, there has been a pretty sizable gap in the quality between a team's best few players and the worst players in the First XI, to say nothing of the bench. Over time, I think this issue has improved considerably despite expansion, although squads still aren't nearly as deep as what you'd find in top European leagues.
I think the best MLS team would have a fair chance of beating a low-level EPL team in a one-off, but as others have said, with the attrition of a long season I'd be surprised if any MLS team could avoid relegation.
Another aspect to consider is the distribution of resources (i.e. payroll) in MLS. From top to bottom, it's much closer than what you find in other leagues. For the teams that do have significantly larger payrolls, all of their additional resources are invested in 1-3 designated players as opposed to spread across the team. If MLS were split into "haves" and "have-nots" to the extent you find in other leagues, the top of the league would be more competitive at the top levels. I don't want MLS to develop the sort of caste system that has emerged in Europe, but parity does force you to make some sacrifices at the top end.
Really upset that I couldn't watch the Revs game last night (out of market). Well, I guess the Milan-Barca outcome will get me over it, but that's really unacceptable from the vantage point of MLS, not to have their PLAYOFFS broadcasted on a national network.
On that note, I'm a big believer that the MLS and US soccer should try to mirror world soccer norms. For example, I think the playoffs are kind of silly and would much prefer a table format. Another example, the away goals rule. I wasn't aware until just now that the MLS playoffs did not use it. Where do others stand on this?
On that note, I'm a big believer that the MLS and US soccer should try to mirror world soccer norms. For example, I think the playoffs are kind of silly and would much prefer a table format. Another example, the away goals rule. I wasn't aware until just now that the MLS playoffs did not use it. Where do others stand on this?
Zososoxfan said:
I don't see a good reason to add it right now. From the games I've seen, I don't see away teams playing conservatively. Ideally, all goals should count the same.
Zososoxfan said:
As much progress as the league has made, the TV ratings still blow and there's a limit to how many games NBCSN and ESPN2 will pick up. I think everything is nationally televised from here on out, though.
There's no relegation battle and competition for places in the CCL is of fairly limited interest, so single table would render a large majority of games meaningless. That said, the current playoff structure is very flawed and doesn't reward strong regular season performance enough.
Titans Bastard said:
It's a catch-22 isn't it though? The ratings suck, so they don't get competitive offers. OTOH, how can they get good ratings without providing such an opportunity to get and develop those ratings? I understand your point generally, but I think the NHL situation is instructive here. The NHL was getting no love from the major networks, so they went to Versus (and the Outdoor Network IIRC) and now NBCSports has been a huge buoy for the league. I don't care if you have to put the games on PBS - there's really no excuse to not promote and market the 10 or so most important games of the season.
Moreover, I understand your point regarding qualification, relegation, and diminishing the importance of some matches, but that's fundamentally my point. First, don't US teams already compete for qualification for the CONCACAF Champions League? I'm out of my depth a bit here, but it seems like it would be pretty easy to shift the current qualification format from including the 2 MLS Cup Finalists to the Supporters Shield winner (in my hypothetical, the league champion) and the 2 runners-up. I would absolutely keep the US Open Cup winner as a qualifier. Furthermore, and I think this has been raised before, the US should look to become involved with the Copa Libertadores to raise their profile and get the better competition. Second, MLS should consider changing its structure, so that there IS relegation. I know this all flies in the face of MLS' current system, but I think it would be very interesting to open the system up a bit and allow for more entrepreneurial opportunities for the USL (or is there another league I'm not familiar with?). The prospect of a wealthy ownership group based out of small and mid-sized cities developing a passionate fan base, starting from a lower division, and eventually competing with the major US city teams is exciting (e.g. FC Green Bay, Oklahoma City United). I mean, I look at the European models of soccer systems and I salivate at the thought of having hundreds of professional soccer clubs in the US. The US population, infrastructure, and affinity for sports and building beautiful stadiums show enormous potential.
Granted, I may be jumping the gun a bit with my enthusiasm for such an overhaul, but I feel like until the US begins to place itself in line with the norms of other soccer associations/federations, it will always feel a bit hokey to me.
Zososoxfan said:
I think getting the second leg of a tie at home is a pretty significant advantage as it is. When you factor in the fact there is a good chance that 30 extra minutes will be played at the home team's park, it starts to feel unbalanced. In other words, I think the fact that no more than 90 minutes can be played in one park but that often (twice last night) 120 minutes and possibly penalties can only ever occur in the other park seems like a big advantage. One way, in my mind, to balance that advantage is the away goals rule, because (1) it reduces the number of times there will be extra time in the second leg of the tie, and (2) when there is 30 extra minutes, the away side is rewarded if an equal number of goals is scored during extra time.
I actually can see an argument that number 2 goes too far, although it seems to work well internationally. I actually think if I could create any system from scratch that involves home and away ties, it would be to go to the away goals rule after completion of the 90 minutes in the second leg. If the teams are still drawn on aggregate after that, then play the extra 30 minutes, but with no away goal priority for those 30 minutes. If it's drawn at the end of the 30 minutes, it's just penalties.
The only solution I came up with for ending a match is this:
End of 90 minutes, each team removes 1 player, and play continues for 10 (or 5 if you wanted) minutes. Then each team removes 1 more player, play 10 (or 5) more minutes, and so on until someone scores (golden goal).
Some Options:
--pick the player (other than the GK) for the opposing team
----I don't like this idea (because it would lead to the best players not on the pitch at the end of a match) really but it would lead to some strategy
--Players can re-enter at the next break (only if you pick your players obviously)
----I also don't really like this because there aren't other situations where players can re-enter the match. However it could lead to teams trying to get a forward 10 minutes of rest so maybe they can get a step on a defender (but they could also tighten up)
I think this would lead to teams that are down a man pushing really hard because 10v11 isn't that bad, but every time a player for each side leaves the disadvantage becomes greater.
The strategy would be, who do you remove, one of your forwards and hope to counter attack? A defender and hope to maintain enough possession so the other team can't score?
End of 90 minutes, each team removes 1 player, and play continues for 10 (or 5 if you wanted) minutes. Then each team removes 1 more player, play 10 (or 5) more minutes, and so on until someone scores (golden goal).
Some Options:
--pick the player (other than the GK) for the opposing team
----I don't like this idea (because it would lead to the best players not on the pitch at the end of a match) really but it would lead to some strategy
--Players can re-enter at the next break (only if you pick your players obviously)
----I also don't really like this because there aren't other situations where players can re-enter the match. However it could lead to teams trying to get a forward 10 minutes of rest so maybe they can get a step on a defender (but they could also tighten up)
I think this would lead to teams that are down a man pushing really hard because 10v11 isn't that bad, but every time a player for each side leaves the disadvantage becomes greater.
The strategy would be, who do you remove, one of your forwards and hope to counter attack? A defender and hope to maintain enough possession so the other team can't score?
Zososoxfan said:
I don't think that's it. MLS has a pretty robust national TV schedule on ESPN2 and NBCSN (as well as UniMas) and the ratings are more or less flatlined even as attendance as increased significantly and the league has expanded its geographic footprint. The core problem that I see is that what interest and TV audience there is in MLS is very much concentrated at the individual franchise level. The market for sitting down and watching a random MLS game on TV just isn't that big. I think all leagues outside of the NFL struggle with this problem to an extent, but it's worse with MLS.
If I knew a solution, MLS would be paying me big bucks.
Zososoxfan said:
Yes, three teams qualify for the CCL through MLS and one qualifies through the US Open Cup. The fundamental problem, however, is that while some may find the CCL endearing and quirky, it's about a hundred times less relevant than the UEFA Champions League. It doesn't offer nearly the same financial rewards and it isn't nearly as compelling a tournament. Who do you get to play? A bunch of Central American teams and some Liga MX teams who, while solid clubs, don't have any cachet or appeal to Americans who aren't of Mexican descent. Over time, history accrues and narratives are built that add intrigue, but given the member profile of CONCACAF the ceiling is rather low. How interesting can Comunicaciones ever be?
If the goal is to give teams things to play for in the regular season, international play is absolutely not an adequate replacement for the playoffs. (Libertadores would be better, but the travel schedule would be brutal. Plus, although the standard of play would be higher, South American clubs don't resonate with most US soccer fans.)
Relegation is a solution in search of a problem. In terms of finance and infrastructure, the chasm between MLS and the NASL + USL is massive. It's just not feasible, nor is it in the interests of MLS owners at this time. If you want to fantastize about pro/rel in the US, the model you should look at is Japan. Any pro/rel system involving MLS (which is unlikely enough as it is) would have a second division spun out of MLS and under MLS control.
I think if you look around the world, you'll find more variation than you might expect. A lot of countries and leagues have their quirks, which is part of what makes the world of soccer interesting.
Titans Bastard said:
I think this gets overlooked a lot when people analyse MLS to the rest of the world. Argentina and Uruguay broke the schedules in half and give a title for each (Apetura and Clausura); but Argentina is has now added a playoff between the champions at the very end (Uruguay was already doing ths). Brazil is only recently breaking away from the traditional state championships and emphasizing the national. Mexico has split seasons and a playoff system similar to MLS's to conclude each.
The lack of relegation underscores the significant difference between a club and a franchise. The franchise model is ingrained in our sports culture and is not going away, but a majority of the soccer world would be repulsed by it.
Vinho Tinto said:
As I've said before, American sports culture and the financial interests of current MLS investors make relegation a very tough nut to crack. But before you even get to that conversation, you need to have enough teams for two divisions. We aren't even close to that because almost none of the minor league teams are financially suitable.
That being said, MLS is at 19 teams, NYC is #20, and Orlando is about to be announced as #21. The league is openly talking about getting to 24 soon. That's a lot of teams and while the major US leagues have had success at 30+, they have no real competition globally. At some point MLS is going to have to balance expanding their footprint domestically and competing globally (i.e. not diluting talent too much). One possible -- but extremely unlikely -- solution to those competing forces would be to spin out an MLS-2. But the popularity of domestic soccer would have to increase several orders of magnitude for that idea to not be laughable....and even then....
Titans Bastard said:
Vinho Tinto said:
I really enjoy this broad-level type of discussion, and both of your contributions are terrific. Perhaps we can swing this into a new thread? A few comments:
1. As an American-Argentine, I have to say that the split seasons is also hokey to me. It completely devalues each championship to me. It also underscored to me just how bad the league (and really the country's) health were doing. Once it switched systems, it was clear to me that Argentines in power felt that their ceiling was a feeder system for the Euro clubs and nothing more.
2. TB, I appreciate your understanding about the TV and attendance nuances of MLS, but how can you not see the problem with not televising the most important games? I think the league needs to look at that as a necessary cost. If you want to black out or regionalize (or some other term I'm not familiar with) some regular season games, go ahead. But, if you're going to utlizie a playoff format, you HAVE to televise all of the games.
3. I agree that the CCL is not an enticing enough carrot, but Libertadores certainly would. Cost would be an issue, but I think with the economy in the US (even in its current weakened state) significantly bigger than any south American country (especially outside of Brazil), this isn't an impossible obstacle.
4. What do you mean by this: "Plus, although the standard of play would be higher, South American clubs don't resonate with most US soccer fans.)?" Mexican soccer fans are passionate, but after living in Florida for 4 years, I can tell you that Peruvians, Colombians, Uruguayans, and Chileans, in addition to the obvious Argentines and Brazilians, are completely nuts about their teams. I also think that generally teams from those countries are better supported in the US than from smaller central American countries, but I have no idea how to look that up.
5. Lastly, what would be the obstacles to making the NASL a de facto second division?
Edit: I posted right after TB's latest post - so, feel free to address/disregard #5 as you see fit.
Interesting tidbit.
I had to do some research on lobbying in New York City - registering as a lobbyist with city government, the paperwork involved in formally lobbying the New York City Council, etc. The filing requirements are very stringent.
The 2013 NYC report on lobbying activity in NYC states that the #1 lobbying client in NYC in 2012, in terms of raw expenditures, was Major League Soccer, with a total of $1,694,216.50 spent lobbying the New York City Council, spread among five different lobbying firms.
I am going to guess that this pertains to the new stadium.
http://www.cityclerk.nyc.gov/downloads/pdf/LobbyingAnnualReport2013.pdf - see page 24.
I had to do some research on lobbying in New York City - registering as a lobbyist with city government, the paperwork involved in formally lobbying the New York City Council, etc. The filing requirements are very stringent.
The 2013 NYC report on lobbying activity in NYC states that the #1 lobbying client in NYC in 2012, in terms of raw expenditures, was Major League Soccer, with a total of $1,694,216.50 spent lobbying the New York City Council, spread among five different lobbying firms.
I am going to guess that this pertains to the new stadium.
http://www.cityclerk.nyc.gov/downloads/pdf/LobbyingAnnualReport2013.pdf - see page 24.