When I let other supporters of the Carolina RailHawks know that I was headed to Atlanta last weekend for a meeting with other supporters club leaders and NASL front office staff, the topic they brought forward to me most to discuss at the gathering was NASL’s new split season format, and in particular, the strange implementation of a 10-game Spring season followed by a 20-game Fall season that NASL plans to implement in 2014.

As it turns out, after the traveling supporters security issue that I blogged about earlier this week, the split season format was the biggest topic all the other supporters wanted to discuss as well. Although most of what was discussed has already been covered thorough by Neil Morris of the Independent Weekly, I thought I’d take a minute to share my particular take on this situation.

First of all, I will say that when I first heard about the 2013 split season, I was incredibly enthusiastic about it. I had always wanted MLS to adopt a single-table, winner-take-all format and the thought that NASL would move to a format that rewarded single-table champions, had a balanced round-robin schedule, and mirrored a format used in 18 other leagues in the Western hemisphere excited me. As my Carolina RailHawks battled down the stretch for the Spring title, I felt pretty confident this was a great thing for soccer fans in this country.

I never imagined the Cosmos would come into the league at mid-season and contend for the title and I think Kartik Krishnaiyer does a great job of detailing how that could tarnish the luster on NASL’s first split-season Soccer Bowl so I won’t retread that ground here. I think what is happening next year is really what has most supporters up in arms.

During the supporters summit, we asked NASL CEO Bill Peterson about the 2014 format directly, and from his obviously rehearsed answer, I can assume we were not the first to question the logic behind the 10/20 format. For the sake of those not present, I thought I’d break down the rationale behind Bill’s answer.

Essentially, Peterson admitted that 2014 is not an ideal scenario by any means. Although he didn’t use the words, I think it would be fair to say that the scenario settled on by NASL could be considered “the least bad” compromise based on some basic tenants that NASL is trying to follow. Most of those principles I applaud and endorse.

The constraints on planning the 2014 NASL season can be boiled down to:

There will be 11 teams in the league.

Fans have asked for a single-table, balanced schedule format.

Fans have asked for breaks respecting the FIFA international calendar

Playing before April 1st or after November 1st for the northern clubs is questionable from a weather standpoint; playing in the heat of summer for the southern teams has been shown to depress attendance and entertainment value of the games.

Teams would like to have a transfer window aligned with the international calendar that allows them to re-tool in between seasons.

Although it wasn’t explicitly stated, I get the real sense that there is another constraint at play here and it is how many gate opportunities each team needs to break even. If you look at the history of 2nd division soccer in this country, it seems that somewhere between 25-30 games is what leagues have traditionally tried to do in order to make revenue. Anything shorter would make meeting ends meet even more difficult than it already is for these teams and playing more matches would make it hard given the calendar constraints above.

Given those constraints, the league owners and front office went through all kinds of scenarios, including considering divisional play, unbalanced seasons, etc. and finally settled on the 10/20 scenario that was announced because it conveniently lined up with a break at the World Cup and didn’t start or end outside the ideal calendar dates. It’s not perfect, but it does honor the general spirit of the voice of the fans and meets the requirements outlined above.

Personally, I’m not wild about it, but I can live with it.

I’m definitely on board with respecting the FIFA international calendar. I vividly remember days in 2010 of watching 3 World Cup matches in a bar (and “hydrating” properly throughout) and then trying to find the will to drag myself outside in 95+ degree and 95% humidity weather in North Carolina to watch a 2nd division soccer game. It was a challenge. One thing I do endorse about 2014 is the planned World Cup break.

I know some people have dreamed up scenarios like teams winning the short season then tanking the long season and winning the Soccer Bowl with a losing record. Sure, it could happen. But I’ve always been the kind of person that said “Tell me the rules, and I’ll figure out how to win.” Given that the rules have been clearly articulated for the 2014 season, I feel everyone has an equal chance to work within those parameters to try to win the Soccer Bowl.

And I know it’s going to get better as the league expands. By the time NASL gets to 15 teams, I think this format will be perfect, with a round-robin format of 7 home, 7 away games in each of the two split seasons. I appreciate that NASL has the vision to stick with the concept they imagined for 2013 and drive it forward through these “growing pain” years to what looks like it will make a lot of sense it just a few short seasons. I look forward to us getting there quickly and putting this awkward period behind us.

However, while I’ve personally decided not to get too worked up over the wonky 2014 format, there is one thing in the way we arrived where we are today that gives me pause. There’s an aspect of the split season that I think is horrible for the professional game in North America.

After my initial reaction to excitement of the split season, I then had a second thought that alarmed me. With the split season format, teams are going to start signing players to “half-year” contracts instead of 1 year or 2 year contracts as was the norm. Without a collective bargaining agreement, this is horrible news for professional soccer players in this country, in my opinion. I’ve known players that have played 2nd division soccer who were only paid $500 appearance fees if they managed to get into the games, with no weekly/monthly guaranteed salary. With lots of competition for their roster spots, there’s no incentive for a team to give even the salaried players a full year contract now, but rather to set it up for the most favorable terms to the team with no leverage to the average player. Without guaranteed contracts for more than a few games, a simple injury or a short bad spell could spell the end of a player’s career. Whereas, if a team had a longer-term commitment to the player, there’s a better chance of getting healthy or beginning to gel better with your teammates to prove your worth and secure your job.

I had hoped this fear was unfounded and teams would not be this ruthless with players, but sure enough, this past summer, I saw a number of news items stating that players, including several of my RailHawks, had not had their contracts renewed for the Fall half-season. This cannot be a good development in the long term interest of professional soccer in this country.