The week before Thanksgiving, Deloitte Consulting published a report that suggested American soccer would be better off if it introduced a system of promotion and relegation, a concept that is often referred to simply as "pro/rel." It's the system used in almost every country in the world: The best clubs from lower leagues move up to the top leagues, while the worst clubs move down. According to the report, and to the fervent backers of the idea, pro/rel would be a cure-all for all that ails American soccer.
It is a tempting vision, that there's one panacea for the sport in the USA.
It's also a false one.
The arguments for pro/rel generally go like this: A league — let's say, England's Premier League — has more fan interest, more investment and better players than Major League Soccer. England also has promotion and relegation. Therefore, it must be promotion and relegation leads to fan interest, more investment, and better players.
In reality, there's no evidence that pro/rel is the root cause of all these benefits. If anything, the egalitarian history of the Football League prevented these things. The Premier League was founded in the 1990s specifically to distance the top clubs from the rest of the English establishment — and provide many of the same benefits that pro/rel would supposedly bring to America.
Backers argue that pro/rel would give potential owners an incentive to invest. But MLS has done just fine in that regard, as evidenced by the league's nine-figure expansion fees and new stadiums. It's hard to see how pro/rel would increase viewership; you can't argue that fans are watching the Premier League to see if Sunderland escapes relegation again this season. And while pro/rel backers claim the system would help player development because of increased investment in players and coaches, any decent club — not just those in danger of relegation — is already doing those things.
The best evidence of a need for American promotion and relegation would be a strong second division, but America comes up short there. The North American Soccer League appears on the verge of folding, with the New York Cosmos, the league's marquee franchise, reportedly in dire financial straits. There are several lower-division teams that have seen strong attendance, but MLS has shown interest in bringing each of them aboard. In a way, American soccer already has promotion and relegation; it's just based solely on investment, not on-field results.
The talk about pro/rel obscures bigger problems with MLS, like the league's single-entity structure and its miserly financial attitude toward its players. If anything, the "closed system" of MLS should be lauded for its stability, not criticized for stifling development. It's one of the few things the league has gotten right. Someday, when there are too many solid, ambitious, well-run American franchises to fit in one league, perhaps pro/rel will be necessary. That day, however, seems pretty far off.
