A new but not necessarily improved USL appears in store for next season. And the under-new-management first division met in Beaverton this week to map out its future.
Owners representing Austin, Cleveland, New York, Puerto Rico, Portland, Rochester and Tampa Bay were in there, as well as representatives from expansion cities Baltimore, Detroit, Edmonton and Ottawa. Charleston didn’t attend, but is apparently on board. No mention of Vancouver.
So, that is the spin from HQ- what is actually happening on the ground regarding the unhappiness some teams have had with USL?
× Flag comment
As a practical matter, I don’t think I’m going to be able to look seriously at that until the Sounders’ season ends.
I checked for Portland and Vancouver reports today and didn’t find anything.
Locally, I did talk to Tacoma Tide ownership last week, and there is no indication that the USL shakeup will reach to the PDL teams around Puget Sound. The failure of the long-time Cascade Surge club from Salem seems unrelated to the USL ownership issues.
× Flag comment
The USL has already wished Vancouver and Montreal well as they’re parting ways. Vancouver is apparently looking at the breakaway group but might go dark for a season.
× Flag comment
Don- here’s to you not being able to look more deeply until December…
I’ve only paid a little attention to this dispute, because it seemed to be within that one level below MLS (so to speak), and with Vancouver and Portland heading our way it seems to have little impact on Northwest soccer. And the structure of USL seems weird, anyway.
As for “off-season” stories, Don, I’d be more interested in a full and clear explanation of the MLS ownership and financial structure- more so than a USL story. Although it might really be connected in the sense that neither league appears to be structured in a way that is familiar to U.S. sports fans.
× Flag comment