A possible MLS shift to a fall-spring schedule would mark consistency with Europe and ease international breaks, but at what cost to the American soccer ecosystem?

American soccer could be facing a major change, with the top tier of the game considering a switch to a fall-spring calendar, one that aligns with the more familiar setup to football fans globally – a similar schedule to some of Europe’s major leagues.

It would seem a tantalizing shift for Major League Soccer. The sport in America is facing a landmark event, with the World Cup set to be hosted by the U.S., Canada and Mexico in 2026. And with Lionel Messi’s arrival in MLS last year, the eyes of global soccer have been trained on the U.S. like never before.

And it goes beyond Messi and teammate Luis Suarez. Players such as LA Galaxy’s Riqui Puig, D.C. United’s Christian Benteke, Portland’s Evander and Columbus’ Cucho Hernández, among others, have helped lift the league to record attendance and revenues.

Zoom out, and this schedule shift seems like a no-brainer. Soccer in the country is constantly growing, and the sport needs to evolve as it continues to expand. But there is, admittedly, some complexity as well. Implementing such a major change, as reporting in the Athletic suggested could happen, would have massive implications at all levels of the game – not just the top flight.

With the topic now firmly on the table, GOAL takes a look at the pros and cons of a potential shift to a fall-spring calendar for MLS.

• Getty Images

  Pro: Consistency with Europe

  It has long been an issue for MLS that it doesn’t run concurrently with the European calendar. It has made the league more difficult to access for some soccer fans – even in the U.S. – who are used to the regular cycle of a soccer season that starts in August and ends in May. In Europe, the Premier League, La Liga and Bundesliga – the three most-watched major leagues in America – have all run on that cadence for years. From the fan perspective, coordinating the MLS schedule with Europe, and concentrating soccer in that specific window, makes some sense.

  And from MLS team point of view, it makes even more sense. There has long been a clash with transfer windows. Despite scheduling differences, MLS holds its summer window roughly concurrently with the European calendar. But due to the structure of the season, MLS teams often lose some of their best players in the middle of the campaign as they move to Euro clubs.

  Yes, some of these are smart, willing transactions – Atlanta United’s record coup in player sales this summer springs to mind. But if competitiveness is the goal, then it makes sense to ensure that players move concurrently during the offseason for all leagues.

  • Getty

    Con: Attracting more regular season viewers

    Viewership and MLS is always going to be something of a debate. The number of eyes on the game is steadily increasing year by year. This season’s in-person mark of 11,085,336 was an all-time high. And although some of that can certainly be attributed to the arrival of a certain Argentine in South Beach, there is a real sense that the league is improving. The league is, increasingly, offering a product that is worth tuning in to watch. A massive deal with Apple TV – one that makes every single game available – has only reinforced that notion.

    Part of the reason it has all worked out is that MLS hasn’t had to directly compete, throughout the length of the season, with some of the other major sports leagues in the U.S. The regular season runs concurrently with some of the NBA playoffs, but with only the midseason slog of Major League Baseball occupying the summer calendar, there is room for MLS to breathe.

    Under a potential fall-spring change, though, the regular season might suffer. If reports are correct, then MLS would be forced to compete with both NFL and college football on weekends in the fall. The MLS playoffs, of course, would be a different question, with a more open landscape vs other sport competition in the spring. But if the goal is to drum up excitement in the early goings of the season, then a wholesale change could prove challenging.

  • Getty

    Pro: No international break issues

    Perhaps the biggest issue affecting MLS sides is the way international breaks can influence their rosters. Traditionally, the oft-maligned pauses in play attract some of the biggest names in the league to travel to represent their respective countries. That is a problem for the big teams, with Lionel Messi and Luis Suarez leaving Miami, for example. But it can also prove to be a problem for smaller markets, with a litany of South American players traveling to wear the badge of their respective countries – not to mention the USMNT influence in the MLS (something new manager Mauricio Pochettino has vowed he will tap into more.)

    This, in turn, causes headaches for multiple parties. Managers dislike it because it makes their jobs harder in terms of team selection. Fans dislike it because they don’t get to see many of the big names play. And it’s not a great look for the league either. A shift would remove the vast majority of those issues.

  • Getty

    Con: Attendance and weather

    It is worth noting, at this point, that reports of a schedule change suggest that the league will take a winter break – perhaps something similar to the two weeks the Bundesliga tends to take at the end of December. But those two weeks will do little to alleviate the harsh winters that some teams face.

    Chicago, Montreal and New England, for example, are all northern teams certain to be in trouble – with soccer being played in single-digit temperatures and potentially snowy, inclimate weather.. But there could be at least 10 franchises that could have fixtures impacted by conditions during the winter months.

    And it’s not just teams that suffer. As good as the MLS product is these days, there is little incentive for fans to show up in open air stadiums in bone-chilling weather for a regular season match. There is perhaps an argument to be made for a schedule shift during specific times of year – with teams who typically play in warmer climates (looking at you, Miami) hosting more games with northern clubs. Solutions will likely be proposed. Either way, it would seem a real head-scratcher for parts of the regular season.

  • Getty Images

    Pro: Legitimacy

    This is, perhaps, where the real reason for all of this happening comes into play. The proposed date for these changes is the 2026 season – coincidentally, just a few months after the start of the World Cup in North America. Could there be a better time for a country, which is still in some ways looking to assert itself on the global soccer landscape, to implement such a seismic change?

    MLS’s global relevance is certainly rising – Opta ranked it the ninth-most competitive league in the world in its most recent index of quality. But due to its calendar, it might always struggle to break into the upper echelon. And more broadly, there is a European snobbery associated with this that, right or wrong, is real. MLS has been successful in shedding its reputation of being a “retirement league” for top Euro talent (and of course, it never really was). But a major step to sealing the deal would be an alignment with the rest of the world.

  • Ben Clemens/Charleston Battery

    Con: Ripple effect

    An existential crisis facing soccer on a global scale is what the future holds for most smaller clubs. Sides lower down the English football pyramid, for example, are broke and trying to stay afloat. Bordeaux, a historic French team, was recently expelled to the fourth tier after going into administration. Reasons for this are multiple. Bad ownership will always be a problem. But there is also an inherent lack of support from respective football associations in keeping everyone together.

    A major shift in American soccer scheduling at the top level could do the same. If MLS changes to a fall-spring setup, what happens to the USL, a summer league? Does its viewership increase, or without the backing of the top tier, does it struggle to stay afloat?

    College soccer, a reliable pipeline for the MLS and which plays its season from August-December, would also seem to be affected. The yearly draft, held in January, would perhaps still survive – but embedding fresh faces into teams in the midst of a competitive season could prove an issue. Reports suggest that there are conversations with U.S. soccer as a whole on these topics, and there would, presumably, be considerations as to how it would impact the entire ecosystem. But there could be an all-too-familiar ripple effect.

    It’s too soon to see how it will all play out, and if MLS actually makes the shift. But it’s clearly a topic that won’t go away.

    “We have been engaged, really, since January, and it’s been very extensive and exhaustive and deliberate,” MLS executive vice president of sporting product and competition Nelson Rodriguez told the Athletic. “It’s still too early. We’re still asking questions. We’re still collecting and analyzing some data. We’re still formulating models. Some of those models are for formats themselves, some of those models are how to assess the information that we get.”