MLS Constantly Shakes Things Up for a Growing League

Major League Soccer (MLS) has always been that league that embraces change—maybe because it gets that keeping things the “same old, same old” just won’t work for a sport aiming to expand in the United States. While Europe’s giants stick to age-old structures, MLS chose from the start not to shy away from tweaking playoff rules, adjusting schedules, throwing in wild cards, and even testing out standings formats that look more like a maze than a straightforward season.

Every new season, there’s a new rule, a new angle, a fresh shot for clubs, and, naturally, a fresh controversy. Up until 2005, it was pretty straightforward: playoffs highlighted the best regular-season teams, either the Supporters’ Shield winners or anyone close enough to contend. But then came the Los Angeles Galaxy in 2005, throwing a curveball by snagging the title with only the ninth-best record in the regular season.

Follow MLS Multiplex on X (Twitter).

That’s when MLS put the idea of wild cards on the table, letting in teams that had solid—but not necessarily flawless—seasons for a shot at the trophy. This choice didn’t just add excitement; it kicked off a whirlwind of trial-and-error experiments that would shape MLS in the coming years. Suddenly, a more flexible system allowed teams outside the top spots in each conference to have a go, too.

Over the years, MLS almost seemed to be playing its own version of “reinvent your league.” One minute, it’s a single-table setup; the next, it’s a balanced schedule. Sometimes it’s the top four in each conference making the cut, and sometimes it’s based on overall points. When they introduced the balanced schedule in 2010, it looked like the league was testing the waters to see if a European-style “everybody-plays-everybody” approach would stick here in the States. But by 2012, it was back to an unbalanced schedule. The aim was to adapt the season to America’s reality—long-distance travel, major regional differences—but all the back-and-forth left fans more than a bit puzzled.

With each adjustment, a new controversy would pop up. For instance, between 2007 and 2010, the two top teams from each conference got their spot, followed by teams with the most points overall, no matter the conference. On paper, it looked like a solid way to balance things out, but in practice, it wasn’t always a crowd-pleaser. And then, of course, there was the “aggregate goal” rule, which, to many, just made the game feel way too bureaucratic.

MLS has a clear obsession with trying to please both fans and clubs. Every change seems like an attempt to meet fans’ thirst for excitement and clubs’ call for competitive fairness. After all, we all want to see the season’s best teams make it to the final, but who doesn’t love a good underdog story—like the long-shot team that manages to hoist the trophy?

What’s funny is, while MLS keeps tweaking its setup, the debate over the best playoff format shows no signs of slowing down. In 2015, yet another shake-up: 12 teams made it, six per conference, and the top team faced off against the lowest remaining seed. By 2019, they moved to a 14-team, single-game format, with the top team in each conference automatically advancing to the next round.

MLS seems set on sticking with this flexible style. For fans raised on European leagues with their straightforward, no-playoff formats, MLS’s ever-changing, “mutant” system might feel odd. But at the same time, the league hooks those who thrive on the unpredictability, the thrill of “win or go home,” and the bittersweet taste of a sudden elimination.