Talk:United Premier Soccer League

Football: American & Canadian Low‑importance

	Association football portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Football, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Association football on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.FootballWikipedia:WikiProject FootballTemplate:WikiProject Footballfootball articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the American and Canadian soccer task force (assessed as Low-importance).

Internal Pro Rel and Division

2 items on the article: USASA amateur leagues are attributed pyramid level 5(or lower if the league has internal promotion/relegation). Secondly, the UPSL appears to have internal promotion and relegation, not promotion up to the pro division and relegation down to the championship division. Both divisions are within the UPSL, therefore the promotion/relegation is 'internal'.Loftybunch1 (talk) 03:07, 22 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

USASA leagues are NOT "attriibuted" to any pyramid level at this time. US Soccer only recognized Tier I-III. Until there is an official pyramid system this category should be left blank. TheScottDL (talk) 18:12, 22 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I understand your point. However, if the standards are that a level should not be listed unless the league is USSF sanctioned, then NPSL and PDL would not have a level listed, but the standard is that they do, and they're level 4. Further, every other USASA elite league with a wiki is defined as division 5, except for the league in Pennsylvania. The majority believe these leagues should not list a de facto level, then the standard should be changed in the footy talk page, but the standard has not been changed, and this league is de facto division 5. Loftybunch1 (talk) 23:47, 23 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I have to agree with LoftyBunch1. It is normal to include the defacto level even though many league pages omit this. Omitting would sets precedent that level should be omitted from npsl/pdl/asl. Demitrius39 (talk) 01:54, 29 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

UPSL Level

@Loftybunch1: There has been an edit war going on about whether to include a level for UPSL, and if so, what it should be. I'd like to kick off a discussion, keep the discussion going for at least a week, and then reach a consensus and stick with that consensus unless there are is significant new information. My opinion on this is that we should not include a level because levels are unofficial, liable to change, and subjective. However if others can cite significant, reliable, independent, third-party coverage documenting an agreed upon level for UPSL then I'll endorse that side. Bashum104 (talk) 00:38, 16 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Bashum104: Hi Bashum, lets discuss. I do think a distinction has to be made between the level of play of UPSL teams and PDL/NPSL teams. It is well recorded that top college talent and MLS prospects play in the PDL (66 PDL players drafted in 2018)[1], and many NPSL players are often taken in the MLS draft most years (3 in 2016, 6 in 2017)[2][3]. The UPSL, which is very young, has no such recorded history. Here are a couple of articles that reference UPSL as being defacto 5th level [4][5]. I would also call attention to open cup qualification [6] in that NPSL and PDL are expressly granted a large number of tournament bids while UPSL qualifies through local qualifiers, and only qualified 2-3 teams. The last point I'd call attention to is the barrier to entry in each league [7]. All that being said, I agree the assignment of level is subjective. My perception is that the public has viewed PDL and NPSL as being defacto division 4 for a long time for their teams' accomplishments on the field and for their players' pedigrees, and leagues spring up claiming to be the same caliber as these two other leagues because they want to claim to be so, making no equivalent financial investment and attracting few equivalent talent players. Loftybunch1 (talk) 04:08, 16 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Per the U.S. Open Cup: 2018 Open Division Handbook, "In the Summer of 2015, the qualifying process was revamped for teams entering through the Open Division (meaning ALL teams outside of the Division I, II or III professional leagues)." - U.S. Open Cup: 2018 Open Division Handbook. There is no "official" division 4 or 5. Thus, USSF clearly states that there's only D1-3, and the Open Division. Santaniego (talk) 23:33, 17 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Loftybunch1:@Santaniego: Sorry for the delay in response here. One of the principles of Wikipedia is WP:No original research. That is to say, it is not our place as Wikipedia editors to decide which leagues are D4 or D5 based on their characteristics. Therefore, for our purposes, it's irrelevant if one league gets more players drafted or gets direct open cup slots or has a higher barrier to entry or anything else. The only thing that we can look at to make this decision is if other independent, reliable, third-party sources are calling the UPSL a D5 league. Looking through your sources, I see only two that directly reference the league being D5: the topdrawersoccer link, which is more than a year old (a lot has changed since then), and the themaneland link, which describes the UPSL as "Division...5...I Guess?". I think we need to look at more sources before we can definitively list the UPSL as a D5 league. There are also sources that list the UPSL as D4: [8] [9]. This podcast calls it D4: [10] which calls the UPSL a D4 league. And this article specifically says that the UPSL could either be considered D4 or D5 [11].Bashum104 (talk) 21:32, 21 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Loftybunch1: Are you okay with me removing the level for the time being, or should we source some more opinions on this matter? Bashum104 (talk) 22:05, 27 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Bashum104: Seems fair, Go for it. Loftybunch1 (talk) 01:57, 28 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Las Vegas Teams

@Bashum104: Why did you remove the Las Vegas teams? SportsFan007 (talk) 21:13, 27 February 2018 (UTC)SportsFan007[reply]

@SportsFan007: They're not listed on the league website. They were at one point, but they've since been removed. Is there evidence elsewhere suggesting that they'll be playing in the upcoming season? Bashum104 (talk) 21:17, 27 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Bashum104: Ah ok, does that mean those teams are defunct? SportsFan007 (talk) 21:21, 27 February 2018 (UTC)SportFan007[reply]

@SportsFan007: It means that as of right now the league doesn't think they'll play in the next season. Very occasionally a team will be added back in for the season after being removed (as happened with the East Bay Stompers Juniors this season) and slightly more often they'll take a season or two off and then come back. But generally speaking they don't return. The UPSL standings page is generally the best source we have for this sort of information. Bashum104 (talk) 21:27, 27 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Summerlin Red Rocks FC

@Bashum104: Where were the Summerlin Red Rocks FC removed? SportsFan007 (talk) 05:10, 28 February 2019 (UTC)SportsFan007[reply]

@SportsFan007: The club joined the US Premiership and there has been no indication of them playing in the UPSL anymore. Bashum104 (talk) 20:14, 28 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Bashum104: Is there a Wikipedia article about the US Premiership? SportsFan007 (talk) 01:07, 8 March 2019 (UTC)SportsFan007[reply]

"Anaheim FC" listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Anaheim FC. Please participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. _signed,Rosguill ^talk 03:32, 12 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Evergreen FC which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 03:06, 26 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

"Soul2Sole FC" listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Soul2Sole FC and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 August 2#Soul2Sole FC until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. _signed,Rosguill ^talk 23:44, 2 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Official Status vis-à-vis USASA in regards to Open cup qualifying?

The UPSL left the USASA but apparently still qualify for the Open Cup via the USASA?

In terms of USOC qualifying, they are considered "open division" (which is a catch-all for everything below Div III professional). Within the Open Division, there's 3 qualifying routes- either through "National league track qualifying", or through one of two USASA competitions- The Winner of the USASA NAC, or as a "Local Qualifyer" through the USASA regional qualifiers. They are specifically no longer eligible for the NAC. It appears that UPSL would meet the requirements for "National league track qualifying", but instead their teams enter through USASA local/regional qualifying alongside the various USASA leagues teams. NISA Nation teams do so as well, but it make sense for NISA-N given that in that case the parent organization, NISA, has dual status, both a direct status with USASA as a "Multi state league" and with the USSF as a professional league. Does UPSL still have an official connection or agreement to/with USASA for this or does the USSF force the USASA to allow it? I thought I had read at one point, somewhere, that UPSL was choosing not to use their status as a National League so that their vast membership could choose individually to enter- or not- the qualifying process rather than base entry on just their limited playoffs - but of course I can't re-find that article now. Gecko G (talk) 18:28, 11 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Gecko G I found your question interesting, so I reached out to some people [12] who know a lot more about the open cup than I and they stated local qualifying isn't USASA specific, but also pointed me towards the Open Cup Qualifying Handbook [13] to determine more about qualifying. I have reviewed the handbook and see where it states under the introduction to qualifying section: " Any team affiliated with any Organization Member of U.S. Soccer and who meets other criteria for participation as spelled out in Section 202 of the Open Cup Policy may enter (find the Open Cup Policy and Team Entry & Information Form elsewhere in this Handbook)." So I believe that this falls under jurisdiction of USSF and not USASA. Do you have a reference stating otherwise? Now the team at TheCup.us agree UPSL could choose the National League track, but from their understanding prefer their teams to choose to enter the U.S. Open Cup rather then being forced to because of the $200 mandatory entry fee. But they did not have a reference to this, just their understanding. Hope this answers your question. Demt1298 (talk) 02:44, 12 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

hmm... looking into things, looks like I might be mistaken due to a combination of remembering the old qualification method (which was last used in 2015) and being confused by various references to the Werner Fricker Cup as being an "Open Cup" on the USASA website. Indeed it looks like USSF took over all qualifying back in 2016 - I was very busy those years and I guess I must of missed the change-over from USASA regional qualifying to USSF regional qualifying for the USOC.

Their recollection about UPSL choosing not to use National League track would seem to match what I remember reading somewhere - Hopefully someone can find the reference, or any quotable reference, for use here on Wikipedia.

Mahalo for taking the time, Gecko G (talk) 04:11, 12 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]