NASL pursuing litigation against US Soccer; Here’s how it might play out

The North American Soccer League (NASL) forum
Fran
Site Admin
Posts: 1204
Joined: Wed Nov 26, 2003 2:49 am
Location: Southampton, PA
Contact:

NASL pursuing litigation against US Soccer; Here’s how it might play out

Post by Fran » Tue Sep 01, 2015 10:20 pm

Great story on the possible outcomes for this case

http://worldsoccertalk.com/2015/08/31/n ... -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.”

robster2001
Site Admin
Posts: 1046
Joined: Wed Dec 29, 2004 11:02 pm

Post by robster2001 » Wed Sep 02, 2015 2:46 am

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.

nksports
Site Admin
Posts: 3668
Joined: Wed Feb 23, 2005 7:53 am
Location: Newton, KS (the land of Oz)

Post by nksports » Wed Sep 02, 2015 5:10 am

[quote=""Fran""]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[/quote]

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).

User avatar
Pounder
Site Admin
Posts: 2727
Joined: Tue Mar 23, 2004 7:01 pm
Location: Portland freaking Oregon!

Post by Pounder » Wed Sep 02, 2015 5:54 pm

[quote=""nksports""]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).[/quote]

Think you missed the new Avaya Stadium. Visible from Norm Mineta San Jose Airport, BTW.
Mean Spirited Blogger #107

User avatar
Sam Hill
Site Admin
Posts: 4142
Joined: Wed Nov 26, 2003 3:29 am
Location: Denver, CO

Post by Sam Hill » Thu Sep 03, 2015 3:19 am

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.

User avatar
Sam Hill
Site Admin
Posts: 4142
Joined: Wed Nov 26, 2003 3:29 am
Location: Denver, CO

Post by Sam Hill » Sun Sep 06, 2015 2:37 am

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.

User avatar
Pounder
Site Admin
Posts: 2727
Joined: Tue Mar 23, 2004 7:01 pm
Location: Portland freaking Oregon!

Post by Pounder » Tue Sep 29, 2015 8:18 pm

Dave Martinez entry in Empire Of Soccer blog... http://www.empireofsoccer.com/details-a ... ssf-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:
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:
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.
@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
Last edited by Pounder on Tue Sep 29, 2015 8:26 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Mean Spirited Blogger #107

Post Reply

Return to “NASL”