There Can Be Only One. Maybe Two. Okay, Maybe Four.
This whole nasty split between the USL and the new NASL seems to inevitably bring up the question “Can there be more than one Division II league in this country?”
While the NASL waits for US Soccer to rule on its application for Division II status, I went digging and found an article in the 1996 USISL Media Guide.
(Quick history lesson: What we know today as the United Soccer Leagues began in 1986 as a small indoor league, eventually added an outdoor component, then split into pro and amateur divisions, then split its pro division into two tiers and, eventually, merged with what had been the A-League.)
USSF gave the USISL’s “Select League” (which was supposed to be a slightly higher-echelon league than its “Pro League”) provisional Division II status for 1996, with the understanding that if they continued to grow and to get their house in order in terms of organization and budgets and things, they would have full DII status in 1997.
On October 8, 1996, though, the USISL and A-League merged into a new, 24-team Division II circuit that kept the “A-League” moniker. Six of the seven existing A-League teams joined up, along with 14 USISL teams and four expansion sides. So we never got to see two competing, fully-sanctioned Division II leagues in operation at the same time, but this passage from the article linked above (you can read a .pdf file here) was interesting:
“The A-League, which operates in the U.S. and Canada with seven teams, is the only other Division II league sanctioned by the USSF, whose rules allow for up to four Division II leagues.”
Now, that was written in 1996, and USSF’s rules could have changed since then. I’ve not heard any official word on the subject from Soccer House, but this would seem to indicate that there’s no real reason there couldn’t be more than one DII league here.
We can debate the wisdom of competing DII leagues all we want, but that’s another story.
December 3rd, 2009 at 2:12 pm
Allegedly, the USSF is unhappy with both parties. The quick sanctioning (provisional or otherwise) sought by the NASL was not forthcoming. So here is the probable outcome if this is not resolved during the next 10 days. -
The 2 groups will be forced to compromise by the USSF by not sanctioning the TOA/NASL outright and force a deal with USL. The USL will be mandated to relinquish full control to the TOA club owners but run the league under the USL umbrella /sanctioned league. The TOA clubs would have complete control on all critical league issues such as marketing/promotion, appointment of a commissioner, national sponsorships and expansion. In return, the TOA teams will pay a small administrative fee for scheduling, registration and referree assignments plus a nominal royalty for use of the USL brand. I suspect USSF does not want the upheaval of a brand new league and the potential unknowns this would entail for second division soccer in North America. I also suspect that MLS does not want a potential rival for sponsorship dollars and notoriety from a nascent, proactive NASL in compelling markets.
This is the best face-saving compromise that should have been worked out by rational businessmen before egos got involved. This type of arrangement will not make anybody happy but that is what compromise is all about. USSF will probably mandate a year for them to make this work during which time both groups can either co-exist or plan on a proper development of lower division soccer collectively or individually.
December 3rd, 2009 at 2:22 pm
You think USSF can mandate this like it’s Yalta?
(That said, jmb, you’ve earned my title of Smartest Guy in Soccer for the moment - not because of this, but because you, unlike most people, looked into starting a professional team, saw that the numbers didn’t make sense, tried like heck to make the numbers work before launching, and then ultimately decided that it couldn’t work and walked away. Too many people try to force it and assume they’ll figure it out as they go along, and they never do. Hence, things like the Cleveland City Stars.)
December 3rd, 2009 at 5:04 pm
Bless you my son! FYI- I still haven’t learned that lesson cause I am still trying to make the numbers make sense… so maybe I am the Second Smartest Guy in Soccer.
If the USSF withholds sanctioning from the TOA/NASL I think they can force both dogs faces into their feces.
December 3rd, 2009 at 5:06 pm
JMB’s plan makes too much sense. Hence, it will not happen. Too many egos have been bruised at this point. Does USSF or FIFA sanction Division status?
This split seems eerily parallel to the CART and IRL split. If there is a Chris Pook sighting, then we know the whole thing is doomed.
December 3rd, 2009 at 5:18 pm
FIFA leaves it to the national federation to sort that stuff out. Unlikely they’d get involved.
December 7th, 2009 at 1:00 pm
[...] nugget that has come to light is from Kenn Tomasch, who unearthed a possibly redundant piece of evidence from the 1990s that more than one Division II league can exist under US Soccer’s [...]
December 7th, 2009 at 1:18 pm
FIFA gets involved only to the point of saying “if you get us involved you’ll be sorry.” In the Chilean case, they intervened to say “if you get the courts involved, you’ll be sorry.” I’m sure that demonstration of FIFA etiquette has to be in the minds of the various USL/TOA players. I’m sure otherwise their first inclination would be to sue the bejeebers out of each other.
December 7th, 2009 at 1:21 pm
FIFA had the hammer, though - they could (threaten to) keep Chile out of the World Cup. I doubt seriously they’re going to threaten to keep the US out of the World Cup over something like this.
But you’re right in that FIFA prefers stuff like this to not come across its desk in the first place. And, if USSF’s own statutes allow for more than one Division II league, this isn’t running afoul of anything. It’s a pain in the ass, but there’s no law against that (unfortunately).