OSC

OSC message Boards

As the home for independent and minor league sports, OurSports Central's message boards are the perfect place to discuss your favorite teams and leagues with other fans, players and team and league administrators. Our boards cover all the leagues represented on OSC including independent and minor league baseball, indoor and Arena football, outdoor and indoor lacrosse, mens and womens basketball, junior and minor league hockey, outdoor and indoor soccer and more. Before posting for the first time, please consult our FAQ. Contact us with any questions.

OurSport Central independent and minor league sports


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1   IP: 68.80.138.113
Old 09-01-2015, 06:20 PM
Fran Fran is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Southampton, PA
Posts: 1,201
Send a message via AIM to Fran Send a message via Yahoo to Fran
Default NASL pursuing litigation against US Soccer; Here’s how it might play out

Great story on the possible outcomes for this case

http://worldsoccertalk.com/2015/08/3...ight-play-out/

On Monday, The Financial Times newspaper reported that the second-tier North American Soccer League (NASL) has launched a legal case against the United States Soccer Federation (USSF) regarding first division sanctioning.

In a nation without promotion and relegation, USSF is able to create arbitrary standards with the first-tier league MLS to determine what D1 standards should be. While the USSF is the governing body of soccer in all its forms in the United States, it maintains a very cozy relationship with MLS through its marketing arm, Soccer United Marketing (SUM), which works closely with US Soccer for promotion and television rights purposes.

According to The Financial Times article, proposed changes have been issued in which to qualify for Division 1, a league would need 16 teams, up from 12 under 2014 rules, per NASL. It would also have to meet a requirement that 75 per cent of its teams be based in cities with a population of more than 2 million people, up from 1 million. It adds that the requirement for all team stadiums is to meet a minimum 15,000 seat capacity for the entire league to qualify for Division I, which NASL argues is “highly unreasonable.”
Reply With Quote
  #2   IP: 73.152.43.249
Old 09-01-2015, 10:46 PM
robster2001 robster2001 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 1,032
Default

This is a Hail Mary because the NASL is in big trouble without Traffic Sports.

If they don't get some money out of this lawsuit, I'm not sure how much longer they can carry on, at least as currently constituted.

I don't think the teams will run back to USL, but that the NASL may eventually collapse to make way for a new league with most of the same teams.
Reply With Quote
  #3   IP: 70.182.252.150
Old 09-02-2015, 01:10 AM
nksports nksports is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Newton, KS (the land of Oz)
Posts: 3,615
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fran View Post
It adds that the requirement for all team stadiums is to meet a minimum 15,000 seat capacity for the entire league to qualify for Division I
I think that means about one team would qualify (Fort Lauderdale) with Ottawa qualifying after its new stadium is finished. 15,000 isn't unreasonable for Division I. Most of the MLS is well over that (except for San Jose at 10,525).
Reply With Quote
  #4   IP: 152.132.10.71
Old 09-02-2015, 01:54 PM
Pounder's Avatar
Pounder Pounder is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Portland freaking Oregon!
Posts: 2,697
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by nksports View Post
I think that means about one team would qualify (Fort Lauderdale) with Ottawa qualifying after its new stadium is finished. 15,000 isn't unreasonable for Division I. Most of the MLS is well over that (except for San Jose at 10,525).
Think you missed the new Avaya Stadium. Visible from Norm Mineta San Jose Airport, BTW.
__________________
Mean Spirited Blogger #107
Reply With Quote
  #5   IP: 184.101.19.208
Old 09-02-2015, 11:19 PM
Sam Hill's Avatar
Sam Hill Sam Hill is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Denver, CO
Posts: 4,093
Default

1) No article on worldsoccertalk.com can reasonably be called a "great article."
2) Traffic owns Carolina and - along with the rest of the investors - owns part of Atlanta. But they have diversity of ownership to where it's unlikely Traffic (which has already largely been gutted) going away would kill the league.
3) Ottawa has been in its "new stadium" since it was finished last summer.
4) As Pounder mentioned, San Jose has been in a new stadium since March of this year. They left Buck Shaw after last season.
__________________
Old enough to remember when bashing the ABA was fun.
Reply With Quote
  #6   IP: 184.101.19.208
Old 09-05-2015, 10:37 PM
Sam Hill's Avatar
Sam Hill Sam Hill is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Denver, CO
Posts: 4,093
Default

5) A letter is not litigation. A lawsuit is litigation. Wake us when a lawsuit is filed.
__________________
Old enough to remember when bashing the ABA was fun.
Reply With Quote
  #7   IP: 152.132.10.71
Old 09-29-2015, 04:18 PM
Pounder's Avatar
Pounder Pounder is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Portland freaking Oregon!
Posts: 2,697
Default

Dave Martinez entry in Empire Of Soccer blog... http://www.empireofsoccer.com/detail...mlsussf-40732/

Cosmos COO Erik Stover pointed a few fingers and talked about the legal threat... and, let's face it, that's designed to influence the standards decision before a lawsuit "needs" to come about.

The fun part... from Stover:

Quote:
Stover highlighted the collusion with a damning accusation, pointing a finger at MLS and U.S. Soccer for “planting” an article in the New York Times to hurt the NASL. The story in question focuses on the FIFAGate scandal hitting the shores of the U.S. in the form of a fan protest against the Traffic Sports’ owned Carolina RailHawks — a key player in the FIFA scandal.

“They put that article in the paper,” Stover insisted. “That is what we are going to be dealing with and I know we will be ready for the fight”
This didn't escape the notice of the article's writer, Andrew Das. He tweeted:

Quote:
Team/Stover is free to clarify. I have had my say privately. Needless to say, I disagree...

...(next tweet)...

"Though I invite @ErikStoverNYC and @NYCosmos to clarify. Soon."
So we must ask if Stover prefers ketchup, A1, or maybe a bernaise with his crow.

Quote:
@AndrewDasNYT I apologize for my poor choice of words. It was not my intention or inclination to challenge the integrity of the Times. 1/3

@AndrewDasNYT In an effort to be open and transparent with our fans, I expressed a personal opinion in response to a question. 2/3

@AndrewDasNYT I was careless in making my point and I honestly feel that the NYT article I referenced was fair and balanced. 3/3
__________________
Mean Spirited Blogger #107

Last edited by Pounder; 09-29-2015 at 04:26 PM.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Hapening ImgHappening Now