In the game of back-and-forth-and-back-again between the United Soccer Leagues and the clubs aligned with the Team Owners Association, it seems that nothing can be said without a response from the other side.


Yesterday, the TOA announced that it was moving forward with plans to start up a new league for the 2010 season, though Vancouver Whitecaps President Bob Lenarduzzi couched that statement as a declaration of intent rather than the confirmation of a split from USL. Sounds like semantics to me, especially with the TOA submitting a Division II application to the USSF. For it's part, USL has shot back, specifically on the issue of that application, with the following press release:


USL Statement regarding USL-1
USL News Release

Tuesday, November 10, 2009

TAMPA, FL – United Soccer Leagues issued the following statement regarding the USL First Division in response to the announcement of an application before the United States Soccer Federation for a new Division II Men’s Outdoor Professional League submitted, in part, by former USL-1 franchises.

Statement:



United Soccer Leagues, founded in 1986, continues to be the only organization with Division II and III Men’s Outdoor Professional Leagues sanctioned by the United States Soccer Federation, providing over 20 years of professional league management experience to its member clubs at all levels of the game.

The new ownership of NuRock Soccer Holdings has made a significant investment in United Soccer Leagues through its acquisition of the business and the retaining of strategic business partners such as Nike, Inc. and Premier Partnerships, which is led by the highly-respected duo of Alan Rothenberg and Randy Bernstein.

While USL does not oppose the right of an entity to affiliate with USSF per the governing organization’s bylaws, it does oppose the current application before the Federation on the grounds that there is misrepresentation, interference with USL business operations and substantial debt amongst the membership of the parties applying for certification.

Although USL is currently working with USL-1 member teams on reforming the structure of league management, USL’s ownership structure and franchise system has been, and will continue to be, in compliance with all USSF and FIFA statutes since its membership as a professional league with the USSF began in 1993.

There is no FIFA regulation stipulating that member leagues be owned by their respective clubs, and in many cases around the world, leagues consist of individual clubs that play in league competitions managed by the respective Federation such as the English leagues (excluding the Premiership), Bundesliga (Germany), La Liga (Spain) and Mexican Primera Division. While some management systems are similar, the models of ownership structure vary greatly throughout FIFA based on each country’s business regulations as well as respective regional confederation and federation guidelines and principles. While there are universal principles woven throughout FIFA, league ownership models are among concepts such as promotion/relegation and the prohibition of two equal-tiered leagues that are not mandated and not necessarily applicable for every federation, such as is the case in the United States. Every league in every federation has its own nuances that make it unique.

The ownership structure of United Soccer Leagues has played a crucial role in maintaining a stable foundation while advancing the sport over decades of growth through both prosperous and difficult financial times. This structure has allowed USL to support and maintain the operation of member clubs such as Montreal and Vancouver during times when the then ownership of the clubs were unable to continue operating, which would have had detrimental affects on both the competition and on all respective markets across the league. With continued financial difficulties being experienced by clubs all around the world as well franchises and leagues in various United States sports entities, USL believes its model, with upcoming reforms to better serve its teams, is an important aspect to a successful future in the USL First Division.


The sniping has gone well beyond tiresome, but this release does bring up a few interesting questions. We've heard, repeatedly, that FIFA prefers, at the very least, that a given competition be owned by its member clubs. That may still be true, but USL is clearly going out of their way to refute what they believe to be misinformation about FIFA "requiring" such a setup.


The decision, and the speed with with it is made, of the USSF is a crucial aspect of this saga. The Federation is being asked to confirm the new (still nameless) TOA league as Division II, while USL views their first division as the rightful holder of that status.


From a logical standpoint, it's hard not to see USL's case as strong and with merit. Will the TOA forge ahead if they are unable to secure certification? At this point, it's a question worth asking, and one that should be added to the five I posed to the TOA yesterday.


Duane Rollins at the 24th Minute also poses a reasonable question about the future of Canada's national championship if both Vancouver and Montreal are playing in an unsanctioned league.


What do you make of USL's response?

For those of you anxious for an update on the status of US National Team forward Charlie Davies, today brings good news; Davies has been released from Washington Hospital Center, and will now begin the long journey towards rehabilitation.


More details are available from Steven Goff at Soccer Insider, and while the prognosis for Charlie's eventual return to high-level soccer can't be termed "good", there's much optimism among his doctors.


Davies will now enter the care of National Team physicians, and will rehab in Delaware with USA trainer John Hashimoto.


Until Davies is able to take to the pitch to fully train as a footballer again, we many not hear much news; the rehabilitation process is likely to be slow and excruciating, and Davies day-to-day recovery will be measured in small milestones.


Still, it's nice to think about an eventual return to soccer for Davies, be it in a US National Team uniform, a Socheaux uniform, or anywhere else.

Jeff Cooper

Now that the Team Owners Association has officially announced their intentions to break away from USL and strike out on their own, there are more than a few questions facing them.

From a fan's perspective, more professional soccer options in the US and Canada seems like a good thing, though the TOA must get themselves ready to play and disseminate their product quickly if they have any chance of succeeding.


And so, to Messrs. Saputo, Cooper, et al., I submit the following five questions:


1. Who's the eighth team? (or, What happened with the Rowdies?)

When the TOA/USL drama first began, the Tampa Bay Rowdies, set to start play in 2010, were listed among the TOA faithful; the resulting fallout now has the Rowdies on the side of USL, meaning that the TOA only has seven teams. USSF certification normally requires at least eight teams, or the promise that more will join shortly to push a league over the magic number (a waiver). Jeff Cooper made noises about other groups looking to invest in the TOA, so perhaps the new league does have someone lined up to step in. But who? And where?

2. Will the league be broadcast?

USL did an excellent job with their first division product last year by making all of the games available for free online through USL Live. They also had a TV deal with FSC, which meant that most weeks at least one USL game was broadcast. Will the TOA be able to secure a similar deal, and will they replicate the USL online efforts? While I worry (a lot) about what the split means for professional soccer in the US and Canada, I would like to see the TOA league play. Without a broadcast set up, the new league might as well take place on Mars; no video dissemination would make it that much more difficult to market and that much more difficult to establish as a serious competition (at least in the minds of the casual soccer fan).

3. Are the Impact sticking around?

The Montreal Impact have been tagged as an MLS club in waiting, yet they're clearly one of the TOA leading franchises. If the Impact do make the leap to MLS, what would that mean for the TOA league? With Vancouver already set to move on (though they've apparently committed to operating a second division club once they do), the TOA could be hurting for clout and money in just a few years time.

4. What role does MLS/SUM play?

We know they have one, so we're curious; is MLS/SUM lurking in the background of this little split, ready to step in at some point with a marketing plan, or official relationship, or something else? SUM is the gorilla in the room whenever it comes to soccer in the US, because they drive the economics of the game more than anyone else. Just assuming due diligence, it makes sense to think TOA approached SUM, and that some kind of relationship was struck. As for Major League Soccer's part, there's a million different ways that could go, from none at all to partnered. If it's the latter, would that mean something for player movement?

5. Are your clubs stable?

The Minnesota Thunder are in a bad, bad place financially, yet they are listed among the TOA's member clubs. If the Thunder are forced to fold, which doesn't seem beyond the realm of possibility at the moment, is the TOA set up to replace them (and then still get to at least eight clubs eventually)? We know Vancouver (gone next year), Montreal (probably gone soon) and one or two other clubs in the group are healthy, but what about everyone else? Miami FC has big money backers, so we should assume they're in for the long haul, though the club has struggled to draw. Without the backing of USL and the organizational structure it provides, the new league must shoulder the administrative costs as a group. It won't be simple, it won't be cheap, and it could stretch already tight budgets even tighter.

Rumors are flying on all fronts today, and my guess is that things will continue to solidify in the coming days. It's beginning to look more and more like one of the major players in the TOA plans is Jeff Cooper, so look for news out of St. Louis. Hopefully some of that news will provide answers to these questions.

World Cup qualifying is over and the United States Men's National Team is set to play two friendlies in the next eight days that could tell us a lot about what fringe players have a chance to go to South Africa. With Charlie Davies almost certainly out for the World Cup and Oguchi Onyewu and Jermaine Jones being massive question marks, there's room for a lot of players to make a name for themselves. Unfortunately, the MLS playoffs are preventing us from looking at many of these so-called fringe players as a part of the national team setup. As a result, we see a few players in the squad that have almost no chance of making the World Cup 23 man roster, and it's unlikely the picture will be any more clear after these friendlies.

A couple of days ago, Jason asked me to come up with my World Cup 23. I drafted up my roster, assuming that Charlie Davies will be unavailable, and that Onyewu and Jones will be. Here it is for everyone, after the jump.

Tim Howard
Brad Guzan
Troy Perkins
Jonathan Bornstein
Jonathan Spector
Carlos Bocanegra
Steve Cherundolo
Edgar Castillo
Jay Demerit
Oguchi Onyewu
Chad Marshall
Maurice Edu
Jermaine Jones
Landon Donovan
Clint Dempsey
Michael Bradley
Stuart Holden
Benny Feilhaber
Jose Francisco Torres
Jose Altidore
Conor Casey
Robbie Findley
Brian Ching

What I think the first XI WILL be:

GK Howard
LB Bornstein
CB Onyewu
CB Bocanegra
RB Cherundolo
CM Edu
CM Bradley
LW Dempsey
RW Donovan
ST Casey
ST Altidore

What I think the starting XI SHOULD be

GK Howard
LB Castillo
CB Onyewu
CB Bocanegra
RB Spector
CM Jones
CM Torres
LW Donovan
RW Dempsey
ST Altidore
ST Findley

Okay guys, what do you think? Am I the good kind of crazy? The bad kind of crazy? Spot on? Borderline retarded? Leave your comments below.

The Teams Owners Association has officially announced their split from the USL. The Atlanta Silverbacks, Carolina Railhawks, Miami FC, Minnesota Thunder, Montreal Impact, Vancouver Whitecaps, and a new club to be formed by St. Louis Soccer United will begin play in April 2010 in a yet-to-be-named league.


The group submitted an application to the United States Soccer Federation for Division II yesterday, and intends to apply for Division I status in Canada.


Montreal Impact owner Joey Saputo was elected Chairman of the new league.


The following is the new league's press release. Thanks to Kartik of The Kartik Report for sending this along:


OWNERS OF PROFESSIONAL SOCCER TEAMS IN

ATLANTA, CAROLINA, MIAMI, MINNESOTA, MONTREAL, ST. LOUIS AND VANCOUVER FORM NEW PRO SOCCER LEAGUE TO BEGIN PLAY IN 2010



Nov. 10, 2009 – The owners of the Atlanta Silverbacks, Carolina Railhawks, Miami FC, Minnesota Thunder, Montreal Impact and Vancouver Whitecaps, formerly of USL-1, together with St. Louis Soccer United today announced that they have formed a new professional soccer league to play in the United States and Canada beginning in April 2010.



The team owners yesterday submitted an application for sanctioning of the new league as a Division II Men’s Outdoor Professional League by the United States Soccer Federation. An application for sanctioning as a Division I League will be submitted to the Canadian Soccer Association shortly and applications to other sanctioning bodies in the region will be submitted as needed.



Joey Saputo, President of the 2009 USL-1 champion Montreal Impact, was recently elected Chairman of the Board of Governors of the new league.



“This is not your typical new league,” Saputo said. “Most of our teams have existed for years. We have united some of the best owners, teams and markets around a new vision for a professional soccer league in North America.



“We look forward to elevating our teams and league in order to give more opportunities to players, coaches, media and sponsors, entertain our fans and play our role in helping soccer truly recognize its potential in the United States and Canada.”



Jeff Cooper, the principal owner of St. Louis Soccer United and spokesperson for the new league, said team owners have commenced a search for a league commissioner and are actively finalizing other details, including a name for the league and its sales and marking plans. The league intends to launch an extensive marketing campaign in the coming months, Cooper said.



In addition, Cooper said the team owners are in active conversations with several teams and organizations throughout the world which have expressed interest in joining the new league.



“This will be a league that will offer the best of both worlds – outstanding experience and leadership at the ownership level combined with the promise and ability to chart our own course for success as a new league,” Cooper said. “It’s this structure that motivated me to bring St. Louis into the new league, and why I believe the new league will have a lot of success at launch next year and well into the future.”


What this means, exactly, is difficult to know at this point. The turnaround time for starting up the new league is short, and the TOA clubs will need get themselves together quickly. We should also find out fairly quickly just how serious claims on both sides (from USL of expansion to Baltimore, Detroit, Ottawa, and Edmonton and from the TOA of other interested parties) are.


Needless to say, with the effusive Joey Saputo as Chairman, the startup of the TOA league should be fun to follow.

On Friday, following Columbus' poor showing at the gate for the second leg of their first round playoff series with Real Salt Lake, I argued that the Crew should be moved to Montreal. The reaction to that argument, which I made as an effort to replicate the knee-jerk nonsense that floats around so much of the American soccer blogosphere (how many time have you heard "he's crap" about a player after one poor match?), was telling; many of you thought the argument well-reasoned enough, or read it already with feelings on the subject in mind, that you agreed with it.


For the record, there was a clue as to the provenance of the piece; I had a note, in super-tiny print, that the post was meant to be tongue-in-cheek. If I failed to convey that in the actual text itself, that's my failing, even if it does prove that Columbus' performance in the stands is worrying to many. I had hoped that the bluster and hyperbole would give enough clues that I was using thin arguments to push for a Columbus move. I guess not, as evidenced by how many took it at face value.


I was mildly surprised by the reaction, though I did receive push-back from some segments of the soccer community; Fake Sigi took it apart, and did so emphatically. Some commenters came to the Crew's defense, and with the passion I would expect from someone defending their club. Still, it seems that dissatisfaction from around the greater American soccer community with Columbus and their attendance woes runs deep, and while I believe that none of the arguments made in my original piece are enough to warrant picking the team up and shipping them off anywhere (much less Montreal, who doesn't need an existing franchise, but should be entering the league as an expansion side), my concerns have been deepened.


Because, although I don't hold to the views set forth in my piece in reality, there is a kernel of truth there. It's hard not to be when the most successful side in the league over the last few years can't fill half of their stadium for a playoff match.


I have trouble divining the line between relocating clubs to best benefit the sport and the league and the need to weather to storm to better build a community of fans that will last, which will only come with a consistent presence in the community (and without the threat of relocation). Relocation, no matter the sport, is distasteful, even as we Americans have come to expect it from time to time. Because the franchise model means sports teams are wholly controlled by private individuals, there's always the possibility that the man (or woman) in charge could pick up and move their asset to another city when money is more easily made. The community, to whom the club belongs on some level even if it's only via an outdated romantic notion, has little or no say.


Columbus has a stadium of their own, stage or not. Columbus has ownership with a solid financial portfolio, operational ineptitude and an inability to understand their fan base or not. Those two facts alone make moving the Crew a non-starter; MLS, and professional soccer in general, doesn't have many cities that can provide both of those elements, and it would be ridiculous to take a club out of one. Columbus' problems involve management and marketing, not an intrinsic problem with the market itself. I have no doubts that if those issues were properly handled, the Crew could increase their average attendance dramatically, and in short order.


I have no special affinity for the Crew, and I don't know much about Columbus. The arguments made in "Time to Move the Crew" may have some validity, but they fall well short of proving that relocation is the best way to "fix" the club. Relocation sounds like an easy answer, and putting the Crew in a market (like Montreal) that would conceivably provide full houses, is tempting. But Major League Soccer's future lies no in band-aids and misdirection, but in doing the hard work of making its teams relevant in each and every market it inhabits. Maybe Columbus wasn't the best place to put a team back in 1996, or maybe it was the perfect place and things just haven't gone well; neither view matters, because the best thing for MLS, MLS fans, and certainly the Crew faithful, is to make it work there.


Next week, I'll present "Time to Move FC Dallas".


Only kidding.

Disheartening news on the ongoing collective bargaining negotiations between Major League Soccer and the MLS Players Union today; the league's proposal last week has the players threatening to strike if it is not improved considerably.


The league has rejected the players push for guaranteed contracts, as well as an elimination of club option clauses currently included in MLS contracts. The former is mentioned regularly as a focus of the players, though it runs counter to most player contracts around the world, while the former is viewed by the players as being in violation of FIFA regulations.


Though the league has proposed a salary cap increase, the players have labelled it a "joke". The cap would increase in single-digit percentage increments in the league's proposal, a disappointing response that seems ridiculous in light of successes gained in recent years.


Workers compensation is another sticky issue, with the league pushing to recoup expenses paid for player injuries if that player receives a workers comp award.


As frustrating as this news is, and as ridiculous as a players strike sounds, remember that negotiations are still in the game-of-chicken phase. I harbored worries that the league would over play their hand, and push for restrictive and overly-restrictive financial terms, fears today's update has done nothing to ease. The union is maintaining that a strike is in play partly because many of the league's players can simply find jobs with equal pay; the minuscule salaries paid on the low end of the MLS scale give them a "nothing to lose" attitude.


A strike would be catastrophic to top-flight professional soccer in the United States, and both sides need to keep that in mind. The current CBA expires January 31st; I expect them to get much closer over the course of the next two and half months, but there will likely be one or two issues that will determine if an agreement is reached before that deadline. Let's hope the owners and the union can reach common ground.

Bob Bradley has called in a 22-man roster ahead of a friendly against Slovakia set for Saturday, November 14th in Bratislava (10 am ET, FSC). The squad is a blend of European-based players and MLS players available.


With more than a handful of players who would have likely been selected tied up with the MLS playoffs, Bradley called in a mix of National Team veterans and younger players. With no Tim Howard in the team, the European friendlies represent a good chance for number two keeper Brad Guzan to get some first team time.


Three players that jump out as interesting choices are MLS Golden Boot winner Jeff Cunningham, his teammate at FC Dallas Dax MaCarty, and long out-of-favor striker Eddie Johnson. The first two are extremely unlikely to make next year's World Cup roster, but Johnson's inclusion could be the first chance for him to take a step in that direction. The loss of Charlie Davies through the tournament has created a hole, and Johnson may be as likely a choice as any to fill it.


Another player who might step in for Davies, Robbie Findley, is one of the unavailable MLSers; RSL's victory over the Crew on Thursday eliminated any chance to see the speedy striker during this pair of friendlies, an unfortunate consequence of the timing of the MLS playoffs.


This is an extremely uneven roster. Bradley did the best he could, I suppose, and no names jump out as "missing" in any real sense (unless you're holding out hope for Freddy Adu, but he needs days in training with Belennesses more than he does a National Team call up). There are not, however, any "unknown" players here, guys that we know little about in the senior setup but have heard could get a look (Jeremiah White, Alejandro Bedoya).


Keep in mind that Bradley's goals for this trip probably have little to do with results and everything to do with finding capable replacements for Onyewu and Davies as well as depth for 2010. Beating Slovakia and/or Denmark would be nice, and we certainly don't want to see a terrible performance in which the Americans aren't competitive; but winning the matches are secondary to the longterm managerial tasks at hand.


Edgar Castillo, also rumored to be part of this set of friendlies, is unavailable due to club commitments, as is Jose Francisco Torres.


The roster:


GOALKEEPERS (3): Brad Guzan (Aston Villa), Marcus Hahnemann (Wolverhampton), Troy Perkins (Valerenga)

DEFENDERS (9): Carlos Bocanegra (Rennes), Jonathan Bornstein (Chivas USA), Steve Cherundolo (Hannover), Jimmy Conrad (Kansas City Wizards), Clarence Goodson (IK Start), Frankie Hejduk (Columbus Crew), Chad Marshall (Columbus Crew), Heath Pearce (FC Dallas), Jonathan Spector (West Ham)

MIDFIELDERS (6): Michael Bradley (Borussia Mönchengladbach), Clint Dempsey (Fulham), Benny Feilhaber (AGF Aarhus), Sacha Kljestan (Chivas USA), Dax McCarty (FC Dallas), Robbie Rogers (Columbus Crew)

FORWARDS (4): Jozy Altidore (Hull City), Conor Casey (Colorado Rapids), Jeff Cunningham (FC Dallas), Eddie Johnson (Fulham)


What do you make of Bradley's roster, and who is missing for you?

It's the last Match Fit USA Soccer Show before The American Soccer Show debuts next week. Things are tense, and Jason and Zach argue about referees, discuss potential call-ups for the USMNT, talk some USL news, and close out with a heated debate about MLS and relocating clubs. Make sure you go to americansoccershow.com to subscribe to the new iTunes feed!

The Match Fit USA Soccer Show, on the Champions Soccer Radio Network.

DOWNLOAD the show

LISTEN in the CSRN Media Player

SUBSCRIBE in iTunes THIS IS THE NEW AMERICAN SOCCER SHOW FEED! EVEN IF YOU ARE SUBSCRIBED TO THE MFUSA FEED, YOU NEED TO SUBSCRIBE HERE!

SUBSCRIBE to the RSS feed

SUBSCRIBE HERE if you want to get all of the great CSRN shows, including The American Soccer Show, Winning Ugly, The MLS Show, Glory Glory Leeds, The twofootedtackle Podcast, and more in one iTunes feed.

by Matt - US Soccer Daily

It seems like Jim Mora and many fans around MLS have been on the same page lately. Five playoff matches have been played, and the crowds have been unimpressive, to say the least. Yes, there was over 35,000 in Seattle, but they’d sell-out a January friendly against a high school JV team, so it’s not something that can be attributed to “playoff fever”. And yes, 25,000 plus turned out for the Chivas USA – LA Galaxy opener, but that’s not out of the norm either, considering the attendance at the regular SuperClasico was similar. Outside of those two special cases, the playoff crowds have been underwhelming at best. It makes me wonder: do people really care about the playoffs? Do we even need them? I’m not a Eurosnob, so hear me out, but based on the kind of attention they actually receive from the fans, I don’t think it would be a bad idea to just do away with the postseason.


Let’s take a look at the other crowds from the playoffs thus far:


Chicago @ New England: 7,416
Columbus @ Real Salt Lake: 11,499
RSL @ Columbus: 10,109


In most sports, the playoffs are when teams draw big crowds regardless of how well they were drawing in the regular season. How often do you see an NBA, NHL, MLB, or NFL playoff game that isn’t sold out? And even if it isn’t sold out, it still draws fairly well. MLS, meanwhile, has struggled to get that extra bump from postseason excitement and attention. Houston and DC have historically drawn well for the postseason, but they’ve also consistently attracted good crowds in the regular season. It’s those teams towards the middle and bottom of the average attendance table that should be getting a bump from the playoffs (as is the case in other sports), but that just isn’t happening. Is it because of a lack of marketing? Weather? Apathy? It’s hard to say, but it just seems like the playoffs are not really different from the regular season in regards to the attention they receive from fans.


I hear so often how playoffs are ingrained in our sports culture, and I agree that they are definitely a big part of how we view our leagues. But the single table format also has a history in the States, in America’s pastime no less. For years, the champion of baseball was decided by a single table. Even with the advent of the World Series, the respective winners of the American League and National League did not have to navigate through the gauntlet of postseason play; they earned that title by simply finishing atop the standings at year’s end. It was only until expansion made a balanced schedule impractical that baseball added playoff rounds. Likewise, football cannot play a balanced schedule, and basketball and hockey choose not to. In these situations where schedules are not the same, playoffs are useful, since regular season standings can be skewed by cupcake divisions and such. But in the past, we have utilized the single table when possible, and I think MLS should do the same.


Beyond the attendance aspect of it, the format of the playoffs irks more than a few people. Who really thinks Real Salt Lake should have the opportunity to be considered MLS champions this year? Does anyone actually think they are a better team than Columbus, or did they just get hot at the right time? Personally, if the playoffs are going to stick around, I’d want the number of teams cut down. Only the best of the best, maybe the top four teams, should go through, so we don’t have a repeat of Steve Sampson’s LA Galaxy title run a few years ago. If this is how the league champion is going to be decided, I don’t want a sub .500 team vying for the title.


If MLS expansion continues, playoffs might be necessary, but for what will be a 16 team league next year, things are set up perfectly for a 30 game balanced schedule and a single table to decide the champion. Regardless of whether Don Garber and company decide to go in this direction, I just hope that they really look at the playoff structure and consider making some changes so that the domestic champion is actually a worthy side.

If you have any reasonable level of motivation on Friday, you're a better person than I. I spent about half the time I usually do trying to find interesting links for today's edition of whatever-the-hell-this-is-called-now, but still managed to scrounge up a few.

• First, Penn State soccer players are excited about the Philadelphia Union. Maybe. Again, we have an example of a college soccer player admitting he doesn't pay much attention to MLS; that bugs me, a lot, but at least he's willing to give it a shot thanks to the Union starting up in 2010.

• MLS has a female official, and she's a former speed-skating Canadian. Seems weird, especially since I wasn't aware that MLS had a female official, but maybe that just proves the point that it doesn't matter. Besides, if she works for MLS, she has to be terrible.

• An "on this day in history" note: On November 6, 1869, Rutgers and Princeton played the first ever intercollegiate football game in the United States. The sport they were playing was probably a bit soccer and a bit rugby, since they didn't yet seem to know what exactly the rules were back then. The English FA had only codified the first set of established laws of the game (which were still not universally accepted) in 1863, and the Yanks, as usual, did their own thing. The game between Rutgers and Princeton surely looked more like soccer than it did American football, but it doesn't really matter; intercollegiate "football" turned more towards rugby and then diverged further with the rules largly drawn up by Walter Camp in the late 19th century. It's impossible to know where the US would be as a soccer nation if the rules adopted were those of association football instead, but I'm pretty sure we wouldn't be worried about soccer "catching on".

Deep Cuts, also known as Shallow Scratches, appears as daily as is possible and brings together stories relating to American Soccer from around the web. If you have a link for Shallow Scratches/Deep Cuts, feel free to email it to matchfitusa@gmail.com.

This post is meant to be tongue-in-cheek. Or not. It was supposed to be, but apparently I failed. Maybe the Crew really should be moved...

Another playoff run, another Columbus disappointment, and I don't mean on the field. Despite having what has been the best team in Major League Soccer over the last two seasons, Columbus fans still fail to show up in big numbers at Crew Stadium. Last night, only 10,109 could be bothered to watch the men in yellow go down to Real Salt Lake. Lest you think this is an aberration, brought on by the opponent (no one ever accused RSL of being a big draw) or the day of the week, note that during last year's run to the Cup final, Columbus only averaged 13,000 between two home matches.


That, my friends, is what we call "not good enough".


Perhaps you're inclined to put the onus of poor attendance on Hunt Sports Group, the owners of the Crew and proprietors of one of the league's other poor attendance performers, FC Dallas. Unfortunately, HSG can't be used as an excuse. Americans love a winner; it's proven, it's true, and it generally means people show up to partake in the glory. Correct me if I'm wrong, but the Crew have been winners in recent years. Americans love a winner?


I guess it the axiom doesn't apply in good old C'bus.


Why that might be, I have no idea. It doesn't make sense to me that metropolitan area with a population of 1.7 million (good for 32nd in the country) can't provide enough fans to fill a stadium with a capacity of 22,555. The Crew's regular-season average over the last two years is less than 15,000. Sure, Columbus is college football town. Sure, it's not a city with a large Hispanic population that could augment their soccer fan base. Sure, the game is a tough sell in the Midwest, a part of the country dominated by American football and college basketball. Still, none of those represent reasonable excuses for why the Crew can't draw a decent crowd.


Crew Stadium itself is a landmark of American soccer, the first dedicated venue for the sport in the United States built in the modern era. It will always be viewed as representative of the rise of soccer here, a monument to the builders of MLS and their dedication to the sport. But that history, and that status as both an MLS first and as a reliable home for the US National Team, should not keep the league from doing what is necessary. Major League Soccer just isn't working in Columbus, Ohio. Believe it or not, it's time to move the Crew.


Don't be so shocked. MLS has shown the necessary callousness in the past when it was clear a market wasn't cutting it. Yes, they went back to San Jose despite evidence that the place was a deathbed for stadium deals. Yes, they went into Salt Lake City before Toronto, though that hasn't worked out so poorly. But they killed the Florida teams, as they should have, and have shown good foresight with expansion teams since. Forget Crew Stadium; if the Crew can't draw respectable crowds, why should they remain in Columbus?


Back in the summer, when DC United was going through stadium plan travails, MLS Commissioner Don Garber said what needed to be said to the local governments of the region: Find a place for United, or the league might find it necessary to move the team. DC United is one of the flagship franchises in MLS, and yet they weren't deemed untouchable from the distasteful step of moving clubs like chess pieces, to homes that will both properly appreciate them and maximize the league's bottom line. United's situation is clearly different than that of Columbus, and yet somehow they're related; original MLS teams, each with issues in their markets, whose future in those markets should not be assured.


Anathema? I don't think so.


Luckily enough, there's a market in North America ready and willing to accept a Major League Soccer team: Montreal. There's a stadium (ready to be expanded), an owner who could take the Crew off the hands of the Hunt Sports Group (who would be better off focusing on one club), and a fan base ready to show up. "Perfect" doesn't begin to describe it.


Montreal is an MLS market waiting to happen. The city's eventual entry into the league is seen as a foregone conclusion, and the people there have proved that they'll fill any stadium presented to them. Stade Saputo, sold out on a regular if not consistent basis? Done. Olympic Stadium, with 50,000+ for a CONCACAF Champions League game? Done. It's a matter of simple math; Montreal offers fans willing to spend their hard earned money on soccer while Columbus continues to prove that winner or not, they just won't come out.


Canada is the new frontier for Major League Soccer. A whole other country connected to the United States by cultural links, common language (mostly), and sporting history, the Great White North has much to offer as place to grow the game. I may be American and proud of it, but even a flag-waving, red-white-and-blue-bleeding, son-of-a-serviceman like me can't deny that for MLS to be successful, and therefore for soccer to become a prominent sport in this part of the world, it must go where it's wanted. And it's wanted in Montreal.


I don't think we can say the same for Columbus.


There are a lot of very good, very passionate, Crew fans. The beauty of the Nordecke and the movement that created it shouldn't be dismissed. But a few thousand hardcore supporters just can't make a soccer club, no matter how rabid they are. Columbus had its shot, and I guess you could call it a decent fourteen year run; but it's better to get out too early than too late, and all of those empty seats at Crew Stadium during a crucial playoff match only confirms that the time to get out is now.


MLS, make it happen. Send the yellow boys north, where you have an owner and a city ready to embrace them.

*UPDATE 11/10* Since this still seems to be getting some attention, I should probably point you in the direction of the follow up post as well.

Chad Marshall has won his second consecutive MLS Defender of the Year award, holding off fellow finalists Seattle's Jhon Kennedy Hurtado and Houston's Geoff Cameron.

Marshall was a steady force in the Crew's back line, and despite missing time with the USMNT team, helped Columbus win their second consecutive Supporters Shield.

Marshall was MFUSA's pick among the finalist, though I will note that I fully expect Geoff Cameron to win this award, perhaps multiple times, in the future.

The MLS press release announcing Marshall's win, as well as the Referee and Assistant Referees of the Year (jokes encouraged):

Columbus Crew’s Chad Marshall Wins Visa® Defender of the Year;
Alex Prus named adidas Referee of the Year; Greg Barkey honored as adidas Assistant Referee of the Year

NEW YORK (Thursday, Nov 5, 2009) – Major League Soccer announced today that Columbus Crew defender Chad Marshall was voted the Visa® Defender of the Year for the second consecutive season, and referees Alex Prus and Greg Barkey were voted as the adidas Referee of the Year and adidas Assistant Referee of the Year.

Marshall, the 2008 Defender of the Year and 2009 MLS All-Star, anchored a Columbus defense that allowed only 31 goals during the regular season – a record low for the Crew. Marshall played in and started 18 games during the regular season; he missed four games while serving National Team duty with the U.S. and another six games with a knee sprain at the end of the season.

Marshall’s leadership helped the Crew capture their second straight Supporters’ Shield trophy, awarded to the team that finishes with the best regular season record (13-7-10, 49 points). The Crew’s defense allowed the third fewest goals (31) behind the Houston Dynamo (29) and Seattle Sounders FC (29).

Marshall won MLS Player of the Month honors for August after leading the Crew to a 4-1-0 record during the month, which included four shutouts. The 6-foot, 4-inch, 190-pound defender proved again that he’s not only an imposing force on defense, but also poses a scoring threat whenever he gets forward. Marshall finished third on the team with four goals scored, including game-winning goals versus New York (June 27), Colorado (Aug. 1) and FC Dallas (Aug. 15).

Now in his sixth MLS season, the 25-year-old Riverside, Calif., native was the second overall pick in the 2004 MLS SuperDraft by the Columbus Crew. Marshall joins Carlos Bocanegra and Robin Fraser as the only two-time Defender of the Year award winners. Marshall led the voting ahead of Seattle Sounders FC defender Jhon Kennedy Hurtado and Houston Dynamo defender Geoff Cameron, the other finalists for the award.

Prus receives the adidas Referee of the Year award for the first time in his career. A veteran center referee of MLS games, Prus has worked 169 games in 13 seasons. Prus first served as an assistant referee in MLS in 1997. He has worked five Men’s Division I NCAA Final Four soccer tournaments and was the head referee for MLS Cup 2007 in Washington, D.C.

Barkey has been honored with the adidas Assistant Referee of the Year award. Barkey was one of three assistant referees to represent the United States in the 2006 FIFA World Cup. In 14 seasons with Major League Soccer, Barkey has worked 201 regular season games and 28 playoff games.

The Visa Defender of the Year earned the most votes in polling of MLS players, general managers, coaches, and members of the media. The adidas Referee of the Year and adidas Assistant Referee of the Year were earned the most votes in polling of MLS players, general managers, coaches, referees and members of the media.