Expansion is back. Major League Soccer and expansion go together like pretzels and mustard, and although it was nice as a Crew fan not to see rosters cherry-picked for a couple years in a row I’m glad to know more teams are on the way. With news that New York City might be landing a team in Queens, I started wondering how new teams might affect the travel schedule of the existing teams. My hypothesis was that yet another team on the eastern seaboard would reduce overall travel for all Eastern Conference teams, making life easier for the players and operations more profitable for owners. Looking farther down the road, would that same principle hold true when more teams joined? How would these extra teams affect regular season scheduling and playoffs? What might MLS look like in 2020?
24: The Magic Number
The first thing I decided was how many clubs would be around in 7 years. With a 20th team inevitable, 24 seemed like a feasible number from which to start. 5 additional teams over 7 years would be a more measured rate than MLS’ expansion drive from 2005-2012, which added 9 teams. From a competition standpoint, further expansion will have less and less of a talent dilution effect; each new team will make up a smaller percentage of the overall talent pool. Additionally, the maturity of the MLS academy programs, richer owners and growing TV exposure will buoy a feared drop in overall talent or quality of play. This will increase the total number of matches in an MLS season from 323 to 408, a 26% rise.
There are scheduling niceties that come with 24 teams as well. With 24 teams in the league, some might push for multiple divisions or at least more than 2 conferences. I kept the Eastern and Western Conferences for a couple reasons. One is that as a fan, I’d like the chance to see as many different teams come through my home stadium as possible every year. While I find it disrespectful to the home squad when opposing players are marketed to fans, I do think it’s a nice selling point for a potential season ticket buyer or corporate suite owner to know that they’re going to be able to see every team in the league come through. My proposal would guarantee that every team would appear in every stadium at least once every 2 years. Secondly, keeping 12 teams in each conference will continue and extend the “table” method of standings.
Finally, 24 teams this allows for the unique opportunity to balance within the conference and not increase number of games from what is currently played (34). Each other team within conference is played home & away (22 matches), while each team from the opposite conference is played once (12 matches; 6 home, 6 away). With this methodology, the home and away matches for opposite conference teams are toggled each year.
Gimme 5
My next steps were to pick 5, then do the travel and schedule math. Along with NY2, I’ve added four more clubs that currently are in either NASL or USL-PRO:
• Orlando City Stars
• Atlanta Silverbacks
• San Antonio Scorpions
• Phoenix FC
If your expansion squad isn’t on my map, don’t freak; this isn’t all about which clubs should/could be next on Don’s list. Orlando is making a big push and may have a stadium deal, Atlanta is a huge TV market and would represent a move by MLS into the heart of the South, San Antonio could help to provide a great Texan rivalry and Phoenix has a very large Latino population as well as fantastic event infrastructure and great weather early and late in the MLS season. I also was a fan of MLS’ decision to award MLS Cup to the team in the finals with the best regular season record; an increase in teams located in the south will improve chances of staging a late November/early December cup final in decent weather. With all teams being reasonably viable, we move on to conference alignment…
After adding Phoenix, San Antonio and Houston to the West, Atlanta, NY2 and Orlando rounded out the 12 in the East. I then built a mock season matrix, which allowed me to calculate the estimated miles traveled. Unlike 2012’s schedule, I wasn’t able to account for “twofers”, when a club might play two away matches on the same road swing. Based on 2012’s data, those trips shaved about 6% of the miles traveled off the final tally; I used the same 6% discount to the 2020 estimates.
The Results
I’m not allowed to be disappointed if a hypothesis doesn’t work out, only surprised. So, I’m surprised.
It turns out that based on where I set the expansion teams and how I built the schedule, there was actually an increase in miles traveled. My thought was that if the travel burden could be reduced, it would make for a schedule that’s easier on players' bodies, easier for away fans to attend and more likely to be profitable. However, Atlanta and Orlando are significantly farther south than any other Eastern Conference team not in Texas. Montreal’s trip to Orlando, for instance, is the same distance as Dallas’ flight to LA. While San Antonio would immediately gain 2 in-state rivals in Dallas and Houston, the overall effect on the Western Conference is 9 more trips to Texas (plus 6 Eastern conference teams). Another factor is that by setting up a schedule that guarantees 6 out of conference away matches, I was pushing away matches farther from home. In 2012, teams averaged 4.7 matches/year at an out of conference opponent. For instance, FC Dallas traveled to the Eastern conference only 5 times (Chicago, Columbus, DC, Houston, Sporting KC). Most clubs had 5 such trips, but some had 4. I'd say the guarantee of every club at every stadium within 2 years as well as the schedule balancing trumps this extra travel, but it is good to note that it comes at a cost.
As far as OOTZ games, my theory there is that I’m more likely to watch a match on TV if it’s in my time zone. For Eastern Conference teams, OOTZ decreased just 2%. OOTZ for Western conference teams actually went up 3%. Neither of these results would make a noticeable difference even the most avid fan. The details:
Playoff Impact
With a different take on scheduling, I thought it was worthwhile to take a look at how the playoffs are handled. For me, there is nothing more anti-climactic than the end of the first match of a 2-leg aggregate series. The whistle blows, and so what? I understand the arguments of fairness in a home and home series, but to me a reasonably balanced regular season is a more important consideration.
I say let’s reward regular season performance by tilting the playoffs even heavier in the favor of the team with the better record. I would keep the number of playoff teams at 5 per conference, with a mid-week Wild Card round of the #4 seed hosting the #5 seed. From there, the winning squad goes straight to the home of the #1 seed to play in the Conference Semi-Finals that weekend. The #3 seed would travel to the #2 seed, and all 4 matches are played as elimination games. Winners advance to the conference finals, with the higher seeds hosting the one-match eliminators. MLS Cup would then be hosted by the highest remaining seed, just as it is today. This way, poorly attended mid-week games are nearly eliminated, and teams are given ample time to rest going into the most crucial matches of the year. Given the reduced amount of matches, the entire operation could end with MLS Cup being hosted the Friday after Thanksgiving – a marquee afternoon for a nationally televised event.
