SoccerMLS playoffs are a farce

Beginning of Story Content

David Beckham and the Los Angeles Galaxy secured the top seed for the post-season, but they'll face a difficult opening-round opponenet. (Mark J. Terrill/Associated Press)

I must be going soft in the head.

Maybe it's an age thing, or perhaps I have been in North America too long. Whatever the reason, and against my better judgment, I am prepared to admit I have become a fan of Major League Soccer's end-of-season playoffs.
 
Just not the way they are currently constructed. It is plain wrong and needs fixing.
 
The optimism of spring is ancient history. The dog days of summer are a distant memory. The realism of fall is upon us. A grueling seven-month season, punctuated by a disappointing World Cup, is at an end. Eight teams are left to fight for the right to grace Toronto's BMO Field in late November.
 
Playoffs have always been part of Major League Soccer. Even when there were only 10 franchises, eight earned the right to compete in the post-season.

The addition of six new teams since 2005 has made the struggle to qualify more difficult. And that's exactly how it should be.

'Double' jeopardy
 
We all understand why the playoffs exist. It is partly to do with the culture of pro sports in this part of the world. But mostly it is about money. Neither the league, nor its franchisees, are going to turn down the chance to play more games, sell more tickets, and shift some extra merchandise.
 
Those of us whose soccer education consisted of a single league table, where the leading club was crowned champion at the conclusion of the regular season, have had to adjust. This is not Europe, and North American fans are raised to expect playoffs regardless of the sport.
 
I don't have a problem with the season spilling over into November, even if it means the championship game itself will be witnessed by several thousand hardy, and somewhat indifferent, Canadian fans.

I do, however, have major misgivings about how the two finalists are decided.
 
Since 1998, MLS has annually awarded the Supporters Shield. It is, in essence, a meaningless trophy given to the team which finishes first at the end of the regular season (the Los Angeles Galaxy secured the title with a season-ending victory over Dallas on Sunday). Only five Supporters Shield winners have proceeded to win the MLS Cup.
 
Since major expansion five years ago, the feat has been achieved only once. Sigi Schmid's Columbus club did "the double" in 2008, but the Crew's triumph has become the exception, not the rule. Why is it that the league's best teams, over the season, generally don't finish with the silverware?
 
Perhaps they can't handle the switch to "sudden death" soccer. Maybe they've worked so hard during the regular season, there's nothing left in the tank for the post-season. Or could it be the playoffs are just not fair?

The wildcard problem
 
Various qualification criteria have been tried over the years. Since 2007 MLS has generally employed a system which, it believes, respects conference standing while, simultaneously, gives as many teams as possible a chance of claiming a wildcard berth.
 
The top two teams from both the West and East conferences automatically advance, as do the next four clubs regardless of conference, based on their regular season record. That's all fine and dandy, except when all four wildcards come from one conference.
 
Welcome to the 2010 MLS playoffs. The post-season, which was top-heavy with Western teams last year, has now gone the whole hog. Dallas, Seattle, Colorado and San Jose have joined Los Angeles and Salt Lake in shutting out all but the top two in the East.
 
Now we have a problem over seeding. Or at least MLS thinks it has a problem. It actually doesn't, but it has inexplicably created one. If the Supporters Shield is to mean anything then, equally, being the last team to make the playoffs should also have its place.
 
A simple reset remedies the whole convoluted mess. The eight survivors should be seeded in the positions they finished the regular season. This method ensures there is tangible reward for finishing first and a steep hill to climb for finishing eighth.

No need for conference finals
 
Los Angeles should be playing San Jose in the first round of the playoffs. Real Salt Lake should be meeting Colorado, and New York should be pitted against Columbus. It means only one Eastern team reaches the conference final, which is truly reflective of the weaker conference.
 
As it stands, the Galaxy are forced to play Seattle - a team with the best home support in the league - while Salt Lake, the defending champions, are paired with FC Dallas, arguably the hottest team in MLS in recent weeks.
 
New York, who finished a sizable eight points behind LA in the regular season, get to play the eighth-place Quakes, while Columbus, who finished sixth in the overall standings, are matched with the seventh-place Rapids, a decent payout merely for finishing runners up in the East.
 
The perceived need for Eastern and Western conferences is a mirage. In a balanced League of 16 teams, where every team plays every other team home and away, there is absolutely no necessity for a geographical distinction.        
 
If two Western teams make it to the MLS Cup, they have done so on merit alone. Their regular-season performances rightly gave them a leg up going into the playoffs. We don't need conference finals. We do need MLS Cup semifinals.
 
The knockout stages of any tournament are, by definition, exciting and unpredictable. Only 12 months ago, Salt Lake's no-hopers went and won the whole thing against Beckham, Donovan and company. What's more, they earned the right after beating Columbus and Chicago - the top Eastern qualifiers.
 
Please, Commissioner - let's simplify the playoffs. Regular-season achievement must be recognized in the post-season seeding. Then we don't have to give ourselves a headache working out the myriad permutations. We only have to be able to count to eight.

End of Story Content

Back to accessibility links