On Dec. 19, 1863, a soccer match took place at Mortlake, London between Barnes Football Club and Richmond Football Club. It was the first game under Football Association rules, and it finished 0-0.

Nearly nine years later, the first international match was played at the West of Scotland Cricket Cub in Glasgow, and Scotland and England finished up 0-0.

So before the formalized sport was even a decade old, two of its prominent milestones had finished scoreless, handing any disparager of the sport plenty of ammunition.

We often hear said that soccer is a game of slim margins, and it is true. Goals are rare, so winners and losers are often separated by just a goal. Many times they cannot be separated at all, and both teams settle for a tie.

The proclivity of draws makes soccer very different than any other major sport in the world. High-scoring North American sports such as baseball, gridiron football and basketball frown on ties (draws in many other parts of the globe) and have added various forms of additional play to decide a winner and loser.

“A tie is like kissing your sister,” is well-used put down of soccer draws, and the North American aversion to ties even affected the startup of Major League Soccer. Such was the conventional wisdom that North Americans needed to see black and white, a winner and a loser that it took MLS until 2000 to add a “T” column to the league standings. Even a look at Major League Soccer’s record book offers little in the way of information relating to ties.

SEE MORE: WST is seeking new writers to share their thoughts on the beautiful game.

Underpinning the distaste for ties seems to be the mistaken belief a game that doesn’t produce a winner and loser must automatically be boring. Ties can be but so can a game that finishes with a winner and a loser.

Just last week the Premier League produced two games that finished 3-3, and nobody who watched Newcastle and Liverpool score very late equalizers against Manchester United and Arsenal will forget those matches for a very long time.

When your team is facing the prospect of finishing with nothing, a single point can seem almost as good (or even better, depending on the opponent and situation) as a win. After all, in the process of snatching a point, your team is also depriving the opposition of two.

And what about the situation when not so neutral fans have two adversaries playing each other? A tie is rarely a bad result when two rivals clash – both dropping two points can be better than one finishing with three points. Then there is the FA Cup – hands up those who would prefer a rival to tie and be forced to play again, even more so than being knocked out?

Certainly, over the years, as soccer has had to bend to the vagaries of television and a packed schedule and when it comes to knockout competitions, the role of the replay has been gradually marginalized. It is hard to imagine but there was a time when in the event of ties European club competitions went to replays from round one right through to and including the final.

It was the same for the World Cup and it was not unusual for a place in the finals to be decided by a replay. Even the World Cup finals included replays during the knockout stages, although a semifinal or final never required an extra game. (Of course, the first World Cup to be decided by penalty shootout had to happen at USA ’94 after a 0-0 draw).

The FA Cup still requires replays up until the semifinals and final stage. It is understandable, but there is something lost by not allowing two sides slog it out until the bitter end. The Chelsea-Leeds FA Cup final that required a replay in 1970 was a classic, and five years earlier, Leeds and Manchester United literally battled it out over 180 minutes in a FA Cup semifinal. Then there was the epic Manchester United-Arsenal semifinal replay in 1999.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=quI_LkMj4HI

Perhaps the difference between a soccer fan’s view of a tie and fans of other sports is embracing the added possibilities and permutations ties provide. Rather than being boring, ties actually add flavor and seasoning to what is on offer. We know that league titles and cups are not shared. We will get to a winner eventually.

Impact of a tie

The late Jimmy Hill was the man who championed the idea of three points for a win and one for draw, and over a number of years, he watched the idea take root.

A snapshot of the present Premier League offers a couple of examples of how turning draws into wins impacts the standings. By the same token, salvaging a draw rather than a loss can provide a team with mid-table breathing space.

After 22 rounds, of play Everton has lost five games. That is the same as the two Manchester clubs. But Everton has drawn half of its games so far (11), while Manchester United have tied seven, and Manchester City just four. Everton sit lower mid-table on 29 points and 11th while Manchester United are fifth with eight more points. City are just a point off the top with 43 points and are currently third.

Conversely, Everton has only actually won the same number of games (six) as Chelsea (14th), Bournemouth (15th), and Norwich City (16th). However, while these three clubs only sit four, three, and two points above the relegation zone, Everton enjoys a substantially greater gap, with eight points separating them from 18th placed Newcastle United.

Premier League history

Over the last 20 seasons the Premier League has operated a 38-game schedule. Five times in these 20 seasons, the Premier League winner has recorded the fewest draws (ties); three times the second fewest; three times the third fewest.

Only four times in that period has the Premier League champion recorded double figures in draw: Manchester United (11) in 2011; Arsenal (12) in 2004 (the Invincibles); Manchester United (13) in 1999; and Manchester United (12) in 1997.

On the other hand, Chelsea drew just four games in 2006, the lowest recorded by a champion team in the last 20 seasons. Chelsea also recorded the fewest draws by any Premier League club in a season when it drew only three times in 1997/98.

Finally, some records, in honor of the draw:

135 – Most draws in Major League Soccer history, Chicago Fire (565 games)
32 – Highest percentage of Premier League games ending in a draw in one season (2013/14)
29 – Percentage of matches drawn during the 2015/16 Premier League season.
26.55 – Average percentage of Premier League games that end in a draw each season (through 2014/15)
23 – Most draws in a top-flight English soccer season (Norwich City, 1978/79)
20 – Lowest percentage of Premier League games ending in a draw in one season (2005/06)
18 – record for number of draws in a 42-game Premier League season (Manchester City, 1993/94; Sheffield United, 1993/94; Southampton, 1994/95)
18 – most draws in a Major League Soccer season (Chicago Fire, 2014, 34 games)
17 – record for number of draws in a 38-game Premier League season (Newcastle United, 2003-04; Aston Villa, 2007/97 and 2011/12; Sunderland, 2014/15)
6 – Number of goals scored by each team in the highest-scoring draws in club soccer history (May 2015, Swindon Town vs. Sheffield United; May 2010, Motherwell vs. Hibernian; Aug. 1999, Genk vs. Westerlo; Oct. 1960, Charlton vs. Middlesbrough; April 1930, Leicester vs. Arsenal; source: Sporting Intelligence).
5 – Number of goals scored by each team in the highest-scoring draws in international soccer history (March 1912, Netherlands vs. Germany; May 1928, Hungary vs. Austria; July 1952, USSR vs. Yugoslavia; Feb. 1952, Ghana vs. Ivory Coast; Aug. 1957, Vietnam vs. Singapore; Sept. 1999 Netherlands vs. Belgium; source: The Guardian).

The drafting of players is not unique to sport in the United States and Canada, but it is an idea that has not traveled very well throughout the rest of the sporting world.

When Major League Soccer came into being, there was never a doubt that a draft process would be put in place, just like the other North American leagues such as NFL, NBA, MLB and NHL. The problem right from the start was that while these other leagues were regarded as the best in their field, MLS was a latecomer to the party. The National Hockey League could draft youngsters from Russia, Sweden, Finland and any other country in the world secure in the knowledge that the best of each generation knew that a successful future was tied to joining and excelling in the NHL. MLS had no such cache.

For the new league, the idea that their draft could stretch across the Atlantic or down into South America and “attach” a highly talented 18-year-old to the Chicago Fire or DC United was laughable. Instead, MLS was forced to deal with what it could control – or at least heavily influence – and that was US college soccer.

In the early years, it was not unusual to hear and read of how a MLS side was going to use the draft to help build their club. After all, that was the narrative used by football, baseball, hockey and basketball so why would it be different for soccer? Over the years, such excessive expectations have been tempered by a heavy dose of reality. No MLS club has ever or ever will build a successful team through the draft. Turning up a player or two who turn into dedicated and reliable professionals is a more legitimate target, and perhaps once in a blue moon a player might emerge as one of a team’s top four or five starters.

A few years ago, MLS expanded the draft net in an attempt to make the process more relevant, with players from other countries being added to the available pool. But one thing has remained constant, whether in the “pure” draft or the “tweaked” version – there is nothing that warrants the thousands upon thousands of words written and spoken about the draft.

SEE MORE: 2016’s 10 most intriguing names in US soccer.

Each year we are inundated with speculation of who may go where (thankfully there seem to a lot fewer mock drafts than a few years ago) and critiques of how some youngsters may have done enough at the player combine. We read reports on why a player may be drafted two places higher, or how another’s fortunes may have waned because of poor practice match.

Put that aside and what are the successes – or otherwise – of the MLS SuperDraft? With the 17th edition of the draft set to be held on Thursday in Baltimore, Mar., we looked back on the success recent draftees have had in Major League Soccer.

MLS SuperDrafts 2007 to 2012

The focus here is on the first round draft picks made by clubs between 2007 and 2012. Five basic questions were explored in an attempt to quantify how many MLS-quality players have been unearthed through the 95 first round picks made over these six editions.

1. How many first round picks have played in MLS every season for the team that drafted them?
2. How many players have played in MLS every season, regardless of team, since being drafted?
3. How many players completed their four seasons in MLS with the club that drafted them?
4. How many players completed their first four seasons in MLS, regardless of club?
5. How many players were playing in MLS at the end of the 2015 season?

Charting the MLS draft

Stats Facts

Of 95 first round draft picks chosen between 2007 and 2012 …

• 41 (just over two players per team) have played in every MLS season since being drafted;
• Over 50% (49) were playing in MLS at the end of the 2015 season (eight returned after testing foreign or NASL/USL waters);
• 20 stuck with the team that drafted them, although that number will dwindle come 2016, as some have already moved on to fresh pastures;
• 37 stuck with their drafted club for the first four seasons or more; Sporting KC: 6; FC Dallas: 4; LA Galaxy, New England Revolution, DC United and Philadelphia Union: 3; Real Salt Lake, Chicago Fire, Seattle Sounders, Houston Dynamo, Vancouver Whitecaps, Columbus Crew: 2; Portland Timbers, Toronto FC and Chivas USA: 1;
• 57 played for one or more MLS teams in their first four seasons.

SEE MORE: 10 predictions for the MLS season.

Conclusions

Some clubs are either better at identifying and drafting players (Sporting KC and FC Dallas, as examples) or are more patient and willing to stick with their choices.

With 20 of 95 drafted players playing for more than one MLS team in their first four seasons, there was no shortage of teams willing to give other clubs’ castoffs a shot.

Players of note

Michael Harrington, drafted by Sporting KC in 2007, and has also played for the Portland Timbers and Colorado Rapids over nine MLS seasons.

Chance Myers, Tony Beltran and Patrick Nyarko, drafted in 2008 by Sporting KC, Real Salt Lake and Chicago Fire, have stuck with the same teams ever since.

In 2009, Omar Gonzalez, Chris Pontius, Matt Besler and Kevin Alston were drafted by LA Galaxy, DC United, Sporting KC and New England Revolution. All four completed seven seasons with the same team but only Besler has a chance of making it eight in a row, as the other three have moved on this offseason. Gonzalez was transferred to Pachuca in Mexico while Pontius has moved to the Philadelphia Union, with Kevin Alston going to Orlando City.

Zach Lloyd was drafted by FC Dallas in 2010 and looks to be well placed to take his run into 2016.

Five years ago, Premier League clubs set a spending record for a winter transfer window, but of the $335 million spent during that prolific January, over 80% was accounted for by just four teams buying six players. Scratch the surface and you will see that although a lot of money exchanged hands, many of the deals failed to pay off.

Darren Bent (Sunderland to Aston Villa, $35 million)

Bent had already worked his way through a number of high-priced moves before Aston Villa signed him from Sunderland. Although Villa moved up from 15th at the halfway mark of the season to a mid-table position of ninth at season’s end, the move is regarded as one of the most costly and ineffective in Premier League history.

Bent was eventually released by Aston Villa last summer. The Daily Telegraph calculated that once wages were factored in each Premier League touch of the ball by Bent in a Villa uniform cost $40,000. and each of the 21 league goals came with a price tag of $2.5 million.

Fernando Torres (Liverpool to Chelsea, $74.5 million)

Chelsea paid a British record transfer fee to sign Fernando Torres from Liverpool. During his time at Liverpool, Torres’s strike record was a phenomenal 81 goals in 142 appearances. Although he was to be part of a Chelsea squad that won the FA Cup and Champions League in 2011/12 and the Europa League the following season, Torres’ career hit the skids at Stamford Bridge. He has never again come close to the form he showed on Merseyside.

Torres’ start at Chelsea brought just a single goal in his first 18 appearances, and it weighed heavily on him. The price tag and expectations proved too much, and Torres finished with 45 goals in 172 appearances before moving to Milan on loan in the summer of 2014.

The move became permanent in January of the next year, but within days of the announcement, Torres was again on the move – this time back to his first club and first love Atletico Madrid, again on loan.

With a 32nd birthday coming in March, Torres’s best days have come and gone, and his appearances are mostly limited to that of an Atletico substitute.

David Luiz (Porto to Chelsea, $37 million)

Mention the name to soccer fans and you are sure to receive a multitude of opinions. Some see Luiz as a defensive accident waiting to happen, while others are willing to look beyond his defensive limitations and indiscipline and focus on his speed of foot, passing ability and, on occasion, his incredible shooting from distance.

Famously, Gary Neville once described Luiz’s style as akin to a 10-year-old piloting a PlayStation. The problem for the neutrals — if there are any — is that you can see easily get sucked in when Luiz is “on” only to have you questioning your own sanity when he motors after a loose ball like a squirrel on crystal meth.

Like so many South American players, David Luiz used Portugal, and his case Benfica, as a shop window for his talents. Four years later, Benfica and the third party agency that owned part of Luiz’s rights turned a small investment of around $2 million into a transfer fee of over $37 million.

SEE MORE: January’s latest transfer window deals and news.

During his time at Chelsea, Luiz helped the club win the Champions League and Europa League, as well as the FA Cup. The revolving managerial door at Stamford Bridge saw a number of incumbents opt for using Luiz as a defensive central midfielder, although it rarely stymied his attacking forays.

The surprise was not so much that Luiz was sold to PSG in the summer of 2014 but rather that he lasted a season with Jose Mourinho in charge. Luiz’s playing time was significantly reduced under Mourinho, who has always preferred that his defenders defend. Luiz is very much the antithesis of that approach.

The fact that Chelsea managed to get PSG to pay a record fee for a defender of close to $75 million only goes to prove the old adage of a fool and their money.

Luis Suarez (Ajax to Liverpool, $34 million)

You won’t get many Liverpool fans to admit it, but when Luis Suarez signed from Ajax in late January 2011 there wasn’t that much of a buzz. More attention was being paid to the imminent departure of Fernando Torres. Hours later, the move for Newcastle’s Andy Carroll grabbed the headlines.

The second half of the season was a bedding down time for Suarez, and although his hard work and endeavor impressed fans, his four goals in 13 appearances showed little sign of what was in store.

Suarez’s scoring pace picked up in 2011/12 with 17 goals in 39 appearances, but his ratio of chances to goals scored was still relatively poor – he would do the hard work but he often missed the target. However, over the next two seasons it all came together, and Suarez terrified the opposition with 61 goals in 83 appearances.

There was, of course, discipline problems aplenty, and perhaps it is not surprising that a biting incident involving Italy defender Giorgio Chiellini at the 2014 World Cup Finals provided the backdrop for Barcelona making a successful bid of over $110 million.

Liverpool made a healthy profit but have yet to recover from losing Suarez’s scoring and dynamism.

Andy Carroll (Newcastle to Liverpool, $52 million)

Liverpool paid Newcastle $52 million for Andy Carroll – where do you possibly start?

Before to the 2010/11 season ,Carroll had made 22 Premier league appearances and had scored three goals. Seventeen goals in 37 games in the Championship in 2009/10 had attracted some notice, but scoring goals in the lower division has rarely been a reliable predictor of Premier League success.

But Newcastle took off like a runaway train on their return to the Premier League, and Carroll was the driver. Eleven goals in 19 games and the media, without hesitation, anointed the 21-year-old Carroll as the natural successor to the likes of Jackie Milburn, Wyn Davies, Les Ferdinand, Malcolm Macdonald and Alan Shearer. Carroll was also to be the answer to England’s prayers – an intimidating 6-foot-4 striker who would physically dominate any defender foolish enough to come close.

Liverpool took the bait and after having one bid turned down the pot was sweetened and Carroll arrived to replace Torres. Those who questioned the wisdom of spending over $50 million on Carroll were quickly given a lesson in Merseyside Math. Liverpool received nearly $75 million from Chelsea; spent $52 million on Carroll. Cost to Liverpool: nothing.

The move never worked on any level. Carroll picked up injuries, when he played he was short of match fitness and pace, and most importantly, the goals evaporated. Carroll moved on loan to West Ham in Aug. 2012, and the move became permanent nine months later.

Between his time at Liverpool and West Ham, the last five years have brought Carroll just 22 more goals in 110 Premier League appearances, and injuries continue to dog him. On his day, he can still terrorize defenders, but his days have been few and far between.

Edin Džeko (Wolfsburg to Manchester City, $40M)

It is not fair to describe Džeko’s time at Manchester City as a failure, but neither would it be accurate to describe it as a success.

Džeko’s move to Manchester City had all the hallmarks of a rags to riches story. After being written off by some and loaned out by others, a good run of goals while playing for Teplice in the Czech League enticed Wolfsburg to gamble on the lanky and often uncoordinated striker. It was a $5 million gamble that paid off handsomely as Džeko teamed up with Brazilian Grafite to form a deadly scoring partnership. In three and half seasons between the start of the 2009 season and Manchester City ‘s call, Dzeko scored 70 goals in 109 appearances for the German club.

One of Džeko’s 72 goals in his 189 appearance for City was the added time equalizer against QPR on the last day of the 2011/12 season, without which the scene would never have never been set for Sergio Aguero’s dramatic Premier League-winning goal two minutes later.

It was ironic that Džeko’s contribution that day would come after starting on the substitutes bench. Out of 130 Premier League appearances for Manchester City, Džeko only completed a full game 38 times. Rarely was Džeko a first choice, and it was even rarer to find him working in a striking tandem. It was a classic situation of buying a player who had excelled in one system, then trying to force a square peg into a round hole.

By 2014/15 Džeko’s scoring rate at Manchester City slipped to about a goal every five games, and last summer he moved on loan (now made permanent for $17 million) to Roma of Serie A.

Today marks the 20^th anniversary of the Bosman ruling by the European Court of Justice. The decision is commonly regarded as one of the most momentous in the business of sport, but there have been over the years many misconceptions surrounding the consequences and repercussions of the ruling.

Jean-Marc Bosman was a journeyman midfield player who in 1990 came to the end of his contract with RFC Liège in the Belgian First Division. But RFC Liège unilaterally retained Bosman’s playing rights and refused to sell him to USL Dunkerque, claiming the fee offered by the French club was too low. What’s more, Liège reduced Bosman’s wages and marginalized him from the squad.

Bosman decided to take his fight to the European Union, and five years later the Court of Justice ruled in his favor. Under the ruling, the right for players to move freely to another club within the European Union at the conclusion of a contract was affirmed. Any such move could take place without hindrance, which meant no transfer fee could be sought by the player’s previous club. At the same time, the court also struck down any restrictions on the number of players from the European Union member states that a club could sign or field. Prior to the additional ruling, soccer authorities imposed limits on such signings, and even the Champions League carried restrictions.

SEE MORE: Bosman anniversary finds namesake penniless amid increased freedoms.

UEFA was complicit in imposing such restrictions and in supporting RFC Liège through the court fight. That meant that governing body for soccer in Europe were tainted when it came to plotting a new course.

FIFA recognized that although the rulings applied only to the European Union, the impact would be felt around the world. FIFA marched into the breach and negotiated a new set of transfer and contract regulations with the EU that were eventually applied globally.

It is a commonly held belief that the contract ruling sparked an era of mega-wealthy clubs and resulted in a salary explosion benefitting players. While the “Bosman-ruling” offered players and agents greater leverage, the escalation of rights fees paid by broadcasters and the willingness by sponsors to pay ever more money to be associated with the game has had a far greater impact.

Rather, the ruling was just one more significant legal signpost that over many years has reshaped the relationship of player and club, one that’s gone from little more than serf-master to something more akin to that found in the regular workforce.

And the legal journey is far from over. FIFPro, the worldwide representative organization for 65,000 professional soccer players, is targeting the present system and is following the Bosman gameplan. A legal challenge has been filed in the form of a competition law complaint with the Directorate General Competition of the European Commission in Brussels. Like the Bosman case, a ruling is unlikely to come anytime soon, but past history would indicate that when it does the verdict will be tilted in favor of the players rather than soccer authorities.

But in North America, and in particular when it comes to Major League Soccer, the management-labor relationship is very different. MLS operates as an island of relative tranquillity when it comes to managing salary levels and player movement. The key to Major League Soccer’s ability to play by a different set of rules is the league’s single-entity structure.

It is fair to say that MLS operates on principles more akin to those of a Stalinesque-type planned economy, and it offers owners the sort of control and power that would not be possible anywhere else in the free world. A salary cap, designated players, and allocation money are all convoluted tools by which MLS controls and manages salary levels within the league. Recently the acronym TAM was added to the owners arsenal.

How convoluted are those rules? Here is the explanation from MLS.com of how Targeted Allocation Money (TAM) works.

Similar to general Allocation Money, these funds may be used to sign new or re-sign existing players. Unlike general Allocation Money, however, Targeted Allocation Money can only be used for players earning more than the maximum salary budget charge, which in 2015 is $436,250.

Teams may also use Targeted Allocation Money to convert a Designated Player to a non-Designated Player by buying down his salary budget charge to below the maximum salary budget charge.

When using Targeted Allocation Money to free up a Designated Player slot, a club must simultaneously sign a new Designated Player at an investment equal to or greater than the player he is replacing.

For example, if a team wants to bring in another talented player who will carry more than the maximum salary budget charge, it has two options should it choose to utilize Targeted Allocation Money.

First, a team could use the funds to buy down that player’s charge to below the maximum and keep the Designated Players it currently has.

Or, a club could use the funds to buy down the salary budget charge of one of its existing Designated Players to below the maximum, provided the club then signs a Designated Player at an investment equal to or greater than the player being bought down.

Targeted Allocation Money may also be traded.

Only in America, you say? Who could possibly have guessed that MLS is run by a group of lawyers? But I digress.

The collective bargaining agreement concluded earlier this year that runs until the end of the 2019 season included the TAM initiative, and it also opened the door ever so slightly to free agency. Ironically, the worldwide market for soccer players – encouraged by the impact of the Bosman ruling – has helped insulate and buttress MLS from granting players freedom of movement at the end of their contracts.

MLS’s answer to demands for free agency prior to this contract has been one of pointing to the vast number of leagues around the globe and suggesting that any out-of-contract player is free to peddle their skills to the highest bidder – just not in MLS. Coincidentally, or otherwise, the first player move taking advantage of the new found freedom took place the day before the 20^th anniversary of Jean-Marc Bosman’s victory.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VkgOCXrIZqo

On Monday, Justin Mapp became the first player to take advantage of the new rule and signed for Sporting Kansas City after spending the next last four years with the Montreal Impact. He’s played 303 MLS games since being drafted in 2002.

That tenure highlights the restrictions limiting the first group of MLS free agents. To qualify as MLS free agents, players must be 28 years of age and older with eight years of MLS service, out of contract, or have not had their option exercised. Even then the player’s previous club may have a right of first refusal on the player’s services.

There is always a chance that a decade or so from now Justin Mapp’s move will be looked upon as a pivotal moment in the evolution of MLS, but it is doubtful. Any significant extension of MLS free agency will not come easy and will most likely require a withdrawal of services by the players. Or there again, perhaps the FIFPro action may turn out to be a game-changer that impacts the game around the world, even MLS.

A couple of weeks ago it was reported that Celtic, Dundee and the Scottish Premiership Football League (SPFL) were close to committing to playing a competitive league game in the US. To describe the idea as a bad one would be a massive understatement.

The proposal is borne from a misreading of the sophistication of US soccer market. MLS outstripped the Scottish League as a spectacle a number of years ago, and what is more, fans in North America can watch the best soccer from around the world on television and online in greater quantities than most.

Simply put, North American soccer fans are not going to be taken in by a gimmick match involving two teams from a league that is stuck in reverse gear.

Hard times forces organizations and individuals to reassess approaches, practices and habits, and that is definitely the case with the SPFL. The Celtic versus Dundee idea is a horrible one, but on Monday the SPFL hit on an initiative that might have legs. The announcement related to the revamping of the Scottish League Cup and the details can be found at the end of this article.

Of course, good organizations are constantly assessing how they do business, and they look to accentuate the positives and mitigate or even fix the negatives. That brings me around to Major League Soccer. The 20th season came to an end on Sunday with the Portland Timbers crowned MLS Cup winners, becoming the 10th team to win MLS’s biggest prize.

SEE MORE: MLS’s new TAM rules could lure European-based US talent.

The playoffs provided exceptional drama and entertainment over 39 days, and surely every died-in-the-wool MLS fan watching the Timbers win on Sunday thought back to late October, when Portland’s Cup hopes came literally within an inch of being still-borne. That was when Sporting Kansas City’s Saad Abdul-Salaam’s penalty kick hit both posts and stayed out in what had become a sudden death penalty decider.

There were other terrific moments and great games, and some may even argue that the fight for playoff spots down the stretch also offered high drama. But as strong as MLS finished, it still takes a long time to get to that finish, and it is at the front end of the season where opportunity lies for MLS.

It is clear that the Supporters’ Shield is never going to have the prestige that a league winning campaign has in Europe and other countries around the world. The US Open Cup is a tournament of good intentions, but unless it falls under the direct control of MLS, it is never going to get the respect that a century old competition deserves.

And that takes me back to the beginning of the MLS season, and in particular the time between kickoff in March and the beginning of June.

What MLS needs is an early season competition to reward teams that hit form early rather than offering extra incentive to teams that start slow and then build to a season-ending climax. Rather like the SPFL reformatting of its League Cup, what I’m proposing is a group stage competition with a last eight qualifying for single knockout rounds in the quarterfinal, semifinal and final stages.

MLS has been very successful at building and emphasizing local and regional rivalries, and this new competition could build on that by grouping these rivals at the group stage.

It is impossible to propose a format for this “new competition” that will stick given last week’s announcement of further expansion ahead.

A format for the current 20-team MLS is not going to still work as the league expands to 28 teams over a yet to be defined timeline. A five group-four team system might be a starting point, but as the league expands, other permutations would have to be considered. There again, the 34-game unbalanced schedule will have to be revisited anyway as new teams join the league, so it would just be one more consideration.

Not so fast

“Win-win” is always the aim, but in practice it is much more difficult to achieve. So if MLS did look at a new early season cup competition built around regional rivalries, what are some of negatives? In the spirit of full disclosure, here are three possible problems.

CONCACAF Champions League – Any MLS teams qualifying for the knock out round of this competition starts competitive games before MLS gets underway. A new competition might generate additional fixture congestion at the front end of the season if the number of regular season MLS matches was not reduced.

Friendlies against foreign teams – The annual trek by famous club sides from Europe and the Americas to play MLS teams each summer is a regular occurrence. These friendly games provide a revenue stream for MLS teams but perhaps not as much as we might think once the visitors have skulked back home after pocketing even larger checks. Hopefully, sometime soon, MLS will outgrow the need to be patronized.

World Cup years – Every four years there is the conflict between MLS play and the magnet for top players (and fans attention) of the World Cup. This particularly hurts teams heavy with US internationals. Would a new early season competition exacerbate the situation. Or would it make no difference?

SEE MORE: MLS sees 38% decline in Cup final viewership.

The “New” Scottish League Cup

The revamp of the League Cup competition was one of a number of announcements made by the Scottish SPFL on Monday. For the reformatted competition 40-teams will be drawn into eight groups of five. They will play in a round robin format that starts mid-July and concludes by the end of the month.

Any clubs participating in European qualifiers will join the competition in the knock out round of 16 along with the eight group winners and best four second-placed teams. Seeding will ensure that each group will have a Premiership team included, and the groups will be regionalized wherever possible.

There will be penalty shootouts in the case of drawn games at the group stage with the winners awarded a bonus point.

BT signed on as the tournament’s TV broadcaster for four years in a deal estimated at $12 million. They will broadcast six live group games and all seven from the quarter final on.

The rights fee is chicken feed for many leagues, but it is double what the old format generated. A two-weekend winter break in January was also announced.

The History

The “new” Scottish League Cup structure looks a lot like the format that existed from the inception of the competition in 1946 through to and including the 1982 competition. For four decades the tournament consisted of an initial group stage that generated a final eight.

The draw was often regionalized, which meant that the season kicked off with a number of derbies and other games against close rivals. The other twist to the competition was that, for many seasons, the groups were seeded, with four groups comprising the top 16 teams in the country with lower ranking teams being drawn into other groups.

The result was that the quarterfinal stage provided guaranteed match ups between a top team and a lower ranking side. Given that the quarterfinals were played over two-legs, surprises were rare, but the format did help generate money for lower level teams when playing teams from the then First Division.

The semifinal stage was a one,-game knock out followed by the final that was normally played before the end of October.

Perhaps it was the product of an era, when there was more emphasis on scoring rather than not conceding goals, but the tournament did produce lots of goals and some surprise winners, with eight clubs other than the Old Firm of Celtic and Rangers lifting the trophy 15 times in 37 seasons.

More from Bobby McMahon:

• Emerging Van Dijk follows well-trodden path from Celtic to Southampton.
• Plot points align for Juventus, Milan.
• Vieira appointment shows CFG yet to learn from Lampard debacle.
• Tottenham is entering a defining period on and off the field.

With five games until the half-way mark of the Premier League season, Southampton are at a bit of a crossroads. Sitting 10th, Southampton are nine points behind top of the league Manchester City, and they’re 10 points from the relegation zone.

Relegation was the fate that many predicted back in the summer of 2014, when Southampton sold off half a starting outfield. Luke Shaw, Rickie Lambert, Dejan Lovren, Adam Lallana and Calum Chambers were sold for $125 million. The critics and many fans were apoplectic at Southampton management and ownership sanctioning the “fire-sale,” and the conventional wisdom was bad times were ahead for a side that had only regained a place in the Premier League in 2012.

What the critics did not foresee was the quality of their replacements. The likes of Dušan Tadić, Graziano Pellè and Sadio Mane may have arrived with little fanfare, but before long the Chicken Littles were forced to eat their words.

How far off the mark were they? So wide of the mark that Southampton not only survived but actually improved and finished one place higher (seventh) than in 2013-14.

The exodus of 2015 was minor in comparison to the summer of 2014, with Nathaniel Clyne sold to Liverpool for $19 million and Morgan Schneiderlin to Manchester United for $37 million. However, the influx of new talent continued, with another seven players being added to the first team squad. While Juanmi (Malaga), Martina (FC Twente) and Romeu (Chelsea) have been limited to a fleeting number of appearances, Cedric Soares (Sporting Lisbon) has started 11 of Southampton’s 14 Premier League matches and has generally impressed as a right back with attacking flair. (He looks even better after Maya Yoshida, his replacement last Saturday, put in a less than stellar performance.)

However, it was a player who was signed just as September’s transfer window was slamming who has made the most seamless and impressive start to his Southampton career. It is a pattern that Virgil van Dijk established at Celtic.

In 2013, Van Dijk signed for Celtic from Groningen for $4 million, and his impact was immediate. After only a handful of games for Celtic, he was being linked to a move to the Premier League.

As it turned out, van Dijk spent two seasons at Parkhead. He gained experience in European club competition and picked up a few trophies with Celtic as well as being selected to the Scotland Team of the Year both times.

Southampton finished up paying Celtic $21 million for the now Dutch international, but when you consider that the club pocketed over $30 million from Liverpool in 2014 for fellow center back Dejan Lovren, it has the look of a bargain written all over it.

SEE MORE: Celtic, Dundee consider playing Scottish Premiership match in the US.

At 6-foot-4,van Dijk is as dominant in the air as you would expect. However, anyone expecting to see brute strength trumping technical skill is in for a big surprise. Van Dijk glides over the grass with the grace of a scheming midfielder, and he is as comfortable jumping into the midfield and waltzing past opponents as he is dispossessing them. In fact, he looks as much at home in midfield as he does in a back three or four.

He has a great range of passing and great composure (a shortcoming is overestimating his ability in some situations), and while his height makes him an obvious and very real menace on set plays, he is also a long-range shooting threat. Anyone who saw the howitzer Van Dijk hit against Manchester City on Saturday that nailed the crossbar can attest to his power.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oY-RXVRpnUY

A solid case can be made for van Dijk and the man he directly replaced at Southampton, Toby Alderweireld, as the two best center backs in the Premier League this season. (Alderweireld spent last season at Southampton on loan from Atletico Madrid before making a permanent move to Spurs last summer.) Such is van Dijk’s rapid ascent over the last two years, it is not beyond the realm of possibility that before too long he could be one of Europe’s great defenders. If that time comes, Southampton will once again cash in, and no doubt the canny operators will have a replacement ready in the wings.

Why Celtic has become a feeder club for the Premier League

Celtic’s worldwide support dwarfs that of Southampton, but in terms of financial clout, it is no contest. Southampton generated revenue of $175 million for the year ending June 30, 2015, while Celtic recorded almost $100 million less at $79 million.

The reason is no surprise – the massive TV rights deals engineered by the Premier League. While Celtic has to make do with less than $4 million from the SPFL’s domestic TV rights pool, Southampton received $122 million.

What’s more there is little or no chance that the situation will change anytime soon. Some may see the transfer of Celtic players to a team that has never been considered as one of the top five or six in England as somewhat unseemly. During the 60s, 70s and 80s Celtic sold some of their stars to English clubs, but their destinations were the upper echelons of the English game – Pat Crerand to Manchester United; Kenny Dalglish to Liverpool; Charlie Nicholas to Arsenal.

The advent of the Premier League brought about a fork in the road. As Scotland produced fewer and fewer top class players, an influx of foreign players resulted, and the Scottish game became a gateway to the Premier League. Paolo Di Canio (Sheffield Wednesday), Pierre Van Hooijdonk (Nottingham Forest), Stilian Petrov (Aston Villa) and Ki Sung-Yeung (Swansea) were tempted south while Celtic was forced to start over again.

Celtic: a gateway to Southampton

Kenya international Victor Wanyama signed for Celtic from Beerschot in the Belgian League for around $1.5 million in 2011. A defensive midfielder, Wanyama scored the winner when Celtic beat Barcelona in the 2013 Champions League, but even by then it was clear that Wanyama had outgrown Scottish football and was ready for a greater test.

The additional challenge came when Southampton paid Celtic over $19 million for Wanyama in the summer of 2013. Wanyama’s first season in the Premier League proved to be a bit too much of a challenge. Often the Kenya international looked slow and ponderous, and a series of injuries didn’t help. It was last season, in tandem with Schneiderlin, that things began to really click for Wanyama.

Fraser Forster’s path to an England cap took an unusual path through Scottish football. As a young keeper Forster had bounced around the English game before a loan move to Parkhead. It was there that Forster began to fulfill his potential, and a permanent move from Newcastle to Celtic at a cost of $3.5 million was consummated.

Recognition at England’s highest level followed some stand out performances for Celtic domestically and in Europe. Southampton put in a bid of around $15 million in the summer of 2014, and Forster was immediately installed as the team’s first choice keeper.

Forster was an ever-present for Southampton until he broke a knee cap in March of this year, but he is now close to regaining full fitness, and he may even return before the New Year. A look at some comparison statistics provides a sense of Forster’s impact:

Southampton, with Forster: *29 games and 21 goals allowed for an average of 0.73 per game; clean sheets 13, or one every 2.23 games

Without Forster: *23 games and 29 goals allowed for an average of 1.26 goals per game; clean sheets 7, or one every 3.28 games.

*Premier League games last season and this one.

Southampton Scots

Prior to the globalization of the top flight of English soccer, Scottish players were almost an automatic for top English teams. Cross border rates took countless Scottish players south with higher wages and signing bonuses proving to be too hard to resist.

Southampton was never regarded as a club that targeted Scottish players, but there were some who arrived and made a lasting impression.

Jimmy Gabriel started off with Dundee before moving to Everton and then spent five seasons with Southampton. Of course, Gabriel would then find his way to Seattle and the Sounders, where he would achieve legendary status.

Three Scots were part of the Southampton squad when, as a second division side, the team won the FA Cup in 1976. Jim Steele (signed from Dundee) was as hard and as uncompromising as his name suggests.

Jim McCalliog was signed from 1975 from Manchester United and helped to defeat his former employers in the FA Cup final.

Hugh Fisher was at veteran stage of his career and was Southampton’s substitute (only one back then) when the club lifted their one and only top flight trophy.

Juventus and Milan are two giants of Italian and European soccer, but when they face each other on Saturday, it will be the first time since 2001-02 that neither club has occupied a top four position in Serie A.

On the bright side there are finally signs that Milan and Juventus have established some traction and are looking to aggressively track down the current top five. Two draws and three wins have lifted Milan to sixth with 20 points, while a draw and a loss in their last six matches means Juventus are only one place and two points behind Milan.

An added bonus for both clubs is that the top of Serie A is congested, with just five points (27 points to 22) separating the top five clubs in what looks like the makings of a great title race: Three of the top five teams are looking to break extended scudetto droughts (Roma last won in 2001, Napoli in 1990 and Fiorentina in 1969); Inter finished top of Serie A in 2010; while anyone looking for a comparative Premier League performance to unlikely challenger Sassuolo who sit fifth need only look as far as Leicester City.

SEE MORE: Serie A’s all-time best starting XI.

As for Juventus and Milan, though, Saturday’s match brings some interesting side bars:

Goalkeepers

Gianluigi Buffon was only 23 years old when he became the world’s most expensive goalkeeper after transferring from Parma to Juventus in 2001. Fourteen years on, Buffon is still the world’s costliest goalie, though he has repaid the $50 million fee and more. When Buffon does retire – he’s currently 37 – he will go down as one of the greatest, if not the greatest goalkeeper the game as ever seen.

Buffon made his Serie A debut by keeping a clean sheet against Milan. On Saturday keeping goal for Milan will be someone even younger. Gianluigi Donnarumma will not turn 17 until Feb. 2016, but already he has two clean sheets in four games, and Milan is unbeaten with him between the sticks.

Milan coach Sinisa Mihajlovic had his hand forced after first choice keeper Diego Lopez performed poorly in the opening games, but so far there has been no regrets about blooding one so young.

Experience is regarded as particularly important for goalkeepers, but so many of the truly great goalkeepers (Buffon for one, Peter Shilton for another) have been prodigies. On Saturday, we may catch a glimpse of what the post-Buffon era may look like.

Goal scorers 

Replacing Carlos Tevez’s 50 goals in less than 100 appearances for Juventus was never going to be a simple or easy. Juve opted to pay $36 million rising to potentially $46 million for Palermo’s Paulo Dybala this past summer. Dybala just turned 22 this week and he has made a solid start to his Juventus spell with five goals (including two from the penalty spot) in his seven starts and four substitute Serie A appearances.

While Juventus opted for relative youth, Milan took another route and signed a 29 year-old striker, Carlos Bacca. The scorer of 49 goals in 108 games over the previous two seasons for Sevilla was thought by Milan brass to be a player who could make an immediate impact. Six goals in 10 starts and two appearances from the bench have reinforced that notion.

The fee of $35 million for a player who will turn 30 next year raised some eyebrows, but there is something of Didier Drogba or Diego Costa about Bacca. All late developers, it seemed to take a while to click, but once the goals started to come, they haven’t stopped.

SEE MORE: Why Paul Pogba isn’t worth €100 million.

On Loan

After having a cup of coffee at Stamford Bridge after being sold by Fiorentina in January, Colombian Juan Cuadrado has recaptured his form at Juventus and has become a regular Man of the Match in his 10 Serie A appearances. Scoring a 92nd minute winning goal in the Turin derby at the end of October was the icing on the cake, and if Cuadrado can maintain his form, Juventus would be crazy not to make his move a permanent one.

The much maligned Mario Balotelli is in his second spell with Milan although this time he is on loan from Liverpool, the club Milan sold him to for $25 million in 2014 after paying Manchester City $23 million in Jan. 2013.

This generation’s “enfant terrible” of world soccer, Balotelli is considered to be on his latest last chance. However, this time he has fallen victim to injury rather than any self-inflicted wounds. Balotelli had only started two games with two appearances off the bench before a groin injury sidelined him at the end of September. Things got even worse earlier this week when it announced that Balotelli required an operation and could be out for three months.

The life of a soccer manager is precarious at the best of times, but taking on the senior role at a Major League Soccer expansion club is clearly a triumph of hope over the experience of others. The dismissal last week of Jason Kreis by New York City FC only adds to the already dismal record of inaugural managers of Major League Soccer clubs.

Of the 24 first year teams entering MLS, 46% of their managers have survived for only one season or less, and 75% have failed to make it beyond two seasons.

The rather terse announcement of Kreis’ departure was in stark contrast to the optimism surrounding his appointment in Dec. 2013. At that time there was heavy emphasis placed on Kreis’s MLS experience and how pivotal it was in making the appointment.

“His experience in MLS speaks for itself,” and “with the leadership of Jason and Claudio (Reyna, NYCFC’s Sporting Director) we are providing New York City FC with both top-level knowledge of soccer in the US and world class soccer know-how from Europe. This is the ideal platform for NYCFC to start,” opined the club’s Chief Executive Officer, Ferran Soriano. Nearly two years later and after a first season record of 10 wins, 7 draws, 17 losses, the initial appointment has Kreis looking more like a sacrificial lamb than a key element in building NYCFC.

SEE MORE: Vieira appointment could forge new MLS path for European coaches.

Monday’s announcement of Patrick Vieira’s appointment as the next NYCFC manager on a three-year contract is no ordinary importation of another foreign coach to MLS but rather a visible demonstration of Manchester City’s strategy of global diversification.

There again, to describe it as a Manchester City strategy may not be totally accurate. Manchester City is only one of four club entities located around the world owned by the City Football Group, an Abu Dhabi based holding company. Manchester City in England, NYCFC of MLS, Melbourne City in Australia and Yokohama F. Marinos that plays in Japan’s J-League are all owned by CFG.

The CFG approach is certainly innovative. Ownership of four clubs allows CFG to spread overhead over a broader base while operating in four different regions of the world. The structure also means CFG can offer global companies activation opportunities around the world. The Nissan deal consummated in July is a visible success of the CFG approach.

These and some others are the positives than come from the CFG plan. But there are drawbacks and discernible differences between theory and practice; or, as Mike Tyson, once pointed out, “Everyone has a plan until they get punched in the mouth.”

In pitching the advantages of a four-team “consortium,” the CFG brass have often talked of the opportunity to move players from club-to-club. However, their first real foray turned into a debacle, with CFG being shown to have made a misleading statement relating to the “ownership” of midfielder Frank Lampard.

SEE MORE: 10 things we learned from MLS’s conference semifinal finales.

In the summer of 2014, it was originally it was announced that Chelsea legend Frank Lampard had signed for expansion club NYCFC. It caused great excitement and by all accounts it sold a lot of season tickets. But there was an added twist. Lampard was almost immediately “loaned” by NYCFC to Manchester City, and the move was sold to the fans and media as a way to keep Lampard fit. However, it turned out that Lampard had never actually signed for NYCFC but rather he was registered to CFG.

Rather than joining NYCFC for the start of the 2015 season, Lampard stayed with Manchester City and only joined the MLS club mid-season. It is fair to say that Lampard’s overall performance once he arrived was underwhelming.

The appointment of Vieira shows CFG’s “plug-and-play” strategy also extends to technical staff, and there-in lies the rub. How do you convince NYCFC fans that the appointment of Vieira is in the best interests of their club rather than the Manchester City mothership?

Manchester City was Vieira’s last port of call as a player when he retired in 2011. Since then he has held various roles at the club, including the one he has just left, that of manager of Manchester City’s Elite Development Squad.

SEE MORE: David Moyes is tailor-made for MLS.

Announcing Vieira’s appointment, Claudio Reyna resorted to the old chestnuts of “exemplary drive, passion, dedication, and natural-leader.” Missing from Reyna’s latest managerial endorsement was the fact that Vieira has no experience coaching a top-flight side. More importantly, perhaps, Vieira may have “experienced different leagues and playing styles,” but he has no experience or concept of the unique challenges that MLS presents. Quite simply, there is nothing that substantiates Vieira’s appointment other than his place on the CFG payroll and his need of front-line experience.

It seems that rather than learning from the Lampard fiasco, CFG has set a course to double down. The appointment of Vieira has nothing to do with what is good for NYCFC; rather, an inexperienced coach has been reassigned in the hope he will develop while not causing too much damage in the process.

Perhaps it was losing the opening match of the season to Manchester United, or maybe it has been the controversy freely flowing at Stamford Bridge, but for a team that is unbeaten in their last 10 Premier League matches, Spurs have been getting precious little attention so far.

Granted five of the 10 matches have been drawn, but there has been ample evidence – a 4-1 shellacking of Manchester City a prime example – that an on form Spurs are capable of beating any team in the Premier League, and with Chelsea’s recent struggles, a top-four finish looks to be up for grabs.

But there again, predictions of a top-four finish for Spurs have been as common as the flu over the last six seasons, and all too often the team has floundered down the stretch.

MORE SPURS: Harry Kane excited about Tottenham’s growing belief.

There was a fourth place finish at the expense of Manchester City in 2010. and it resulted in top flight European competition returning to White Hart Lane for the first time since 1962. Two years later, fourth was again secured, but Chelsea backdoored the Champions League after qualifying as unlikely winners.

But more times than not Champions League dreams have turned into Europa League reality. But maybe, just maybe this season might be the one when Spurs deliver over a full season rather than just part of it.

The goal scoring fortunes of Harry Kane generate the greatest discourse, but a credible case can be made that Spurs’ relative success so far has been down to how well they have done at the other end of the pitch. The last two Premier League seasons, Spurs have conceded over 50 goals – 51 in 2013-14 and 53 last season. So far, in 11 games this season, Spurs have allowed just nine goals – a number only bettered by Manchester United and Arsenal.

Then there is the faith manager Mauricio Pochettino is placing in younger players. According to a recent post from CIES Football Observatory, Spurs are fielding the league’s youngest lineup, with an average age of 24.7 years of age, and it is by design rather than a desperate throw of the dice.

Pochettino has his side playing high-energy soccer and fitness and mobility is a necessity. But over the next five weeks, the depth of Pochettino’s squad will be given a rigorous test. There are three Europa League matches, starting with Anderlecht at White Hart Lane on Thursday. On Saturday, Spurs need to travel just a short distance to play Arsenal in the North London derby followed by home games against two other London rivals, West Ham and Chelsea.

As important as these games are, there is another date, Dec. 8, ringed on the calendars of Spurs’ fans. That’s the day that Spurs hope to have their revised plans for a new 61,000-seat stadium come before the Planning Sub Committee of the London Borough of Haringey.

MORE SPURS: Pochettino banishes Townsend after confrontation with fitness coach.

With a present cap of just 36,000 spectators, Spurs are ill-equipped to match the revenue generation enjoyed by the likes of Manchester United and Arsenal, and the White Hart Lane replace/retrofit/move saga has been a long-running tale of plans, revised plans and even more revised plans. But finally it looks like the latest version is going to be given the green light by the authorities. The current plan has a stadium opening date of 2018, with Spurs having to ground share during the 2017-18 season. The current estimated cost is over $616 million which puts it in the same “ballpark” as Emirates Stadium, home of Arsenal that opened in 2006.

The Spurs financing model is not substantially different to that employed a decade or so ago by their greatest and bitterest rivals – the sale of naming rights, some portion financed by property development, and bank financing picking up the rest. Given Arsenal’s experience in navigating the high-wire act of stadium development, it is easy to draw the conclusion that Spurs’ experience will be analogous.

Chairman Daniel Levy’s assurances that the stadium development won’t impact on Spurs’ ability to buy players echoes statements from senior Arsenal figures over the last dozen years. Some people point to the escalation of television rights-fees since Arsenal embarked on the Emirates as a buffer now available to Spurs, as well as a benefit of lower borrowing costs. Both certainly offer Spurs a leg up in terms of managing the risk, but there is another significant difference.

Prior to the development of the Emirates Stadium, Arsenal was not a selling club. They quickly became one with the likes of Patrick Vieira, Thierry Henry, Cesc Fabregas, Robin van Persie, Kolo Toure, Emmanuel Adebayor and Samir Nasri all leaving, most for large fees and seemingly greener pastures. Arsenal dropped from perennial contenders for silverware to a team that targeted Champions League qualification.

On the other hand Spurs have been a selling club for some time. Michael Carrick, Dimitar Berbatov, Luka Modric and Gareth Bale come readily to mind. A look at Spurs financials for the five years to 2014 tells the tale. Over that time Spurs generated a before tax profit of $108 million; during the same spell the profit from selling players was $251 million.

MORE EPL: Ancelotti an option for Chelsea but a better fit for Manchester United.

In other words, if Spurs had not sold players, their cumulative pre-tax loss would have been $143 million. It could be argued that Spurs did recycle some of that profit by bringing in new recruits. Nonetheless, Spurs is the only Premier League team that has generated a positive net transfer spend over the last five seasons – $55 million.

How Spurs navigate the treacherous financial waters over the next decade and how much on-field success can be achieved will be one on the most interesting Premier League stories of the next 10 years.