Talk:North American SuperLiga

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).

Is Canada involved in this?[edit]

Is Toronto FC eligible for the tournament? м info 06:29, 14 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Probably eligible, but it isn't going to be in the inagural tourney. I honestly didn't see if Canada was going to be in the tournament. Let me check...yes. Canada teams can qualify after this year. T.z0n3 17:46, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

German Bundesliga?[edit]

I read this article that says "The MLS is attempting to strengthen its position via a partnership with the Bundesliga, Germany’s football league, and a deal with the Mexican Primera División to create a new North American tournament, the SuperLiga". Does anybody know if there is any truth to the Bundesliga being involved? I believe this is incorrect as I can find no other mention and I thought the premise of the tournament was to build on the US/MX rivalry so do not see the correlation of Germany's league. Anyway, would be really interested if someone can prove/dispel this article. --otduff ^t/_c 13:06, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's two separate partnerships. One with Bundesliga and another with FMF tocretae SuperLiga. --Elliskev 17:02, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:NASuperLiga.gif[edit]

Image:NASuperLiga.gif is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 05:01, 5 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

results[edit]

Do we really need all the results on the superliga main page. Thats why there was a details link to 2007 superliga. Heitz669 03:49, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

host for 2008[edit]

I have seen repeated attempts to list Mexico as the host for the 2008 competition but no documentation. Unless a reference is provided to confirm this, we should not list anything. Ltv100 (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 22:43, 6 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

THIS. IS. RIDICULOUS.[edit]

This is like one of my main pet peeves on Wikipedia, though of course the sheer scope makes confronting it an imposing undertaking.

Repeatedly referring to “football (soccer)” is insane.

This is a North American article. In North American English, association football is called soccer. If the article deals with, say, Germany or England, either the meaning of “football” can be inferred, or an initial mention of “soccer” can be made. In no country and in no dialect is the word “soccer” ambiguous. If you're going to use the word “soccer,” there is no need to mention football. As no native English speakers on the continent except pretentious dicks (usually back from their year abroad) and foreigners ever refer to the sport as “football,” ever (though occasionally “fútbol”), there is absolutely NO NEED for the word football to appear anywhere in this article.
</rant>

—Wiki Wikardo
23:47, 13 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Dude, you need to chill out. No need to yell. Just state the problem if necessary and then correct it. It was a pretty good rant though. JohnnyPolo24 (talk) 15:53, 17 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yea, but one also needs to consider the fact that there is no really North American English language and North American English wikipedia. In some English-speaking parts of the world, say Nigeria, that is how they call the game which in US known as soccer. So, you kind of need to find a middle ground here and do not take it personally. Aleksandr Grigoryev (talk) 05:47, 23 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Statistic Tables[edit]

Why delete the tables? It appears that this tournament is around to stay so why not track all-time statistics like any other annual tournament? By the criteria used to delete the tables, at what point would it be appropriate to reinsert tournament statistics? I believe that all-time statistics are very relevant, showing top performers and how the leagues' teams fare against one another. JohnnyPolo24 (talk) 15:36, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The only thing that would be appropriate would be a table of all time winners and runners-up by club and country, as that is all there is on the Champions League article. The reason I don't think those seperate tables would be appropriate at this point is that there have only been two tournaments, so that information is pretty easy to glean by yourself. The table should only be added when there is a page of results, so that you can't see all of that information by yourself. Also, I could get behind an all time goalscorers list, but only if also added to the Champions League article. As for an all time points table for clubs, I think that is a useless statistic, and you won't find anything like that on a UEFA Champions League or Copa Libertadores article. -- Grant .Alpaugh 16:40, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Copa Libertadores main page has a table including all champions and runners-up both by club and notion, and a seperate top-scorers page exists as well; there is no all-time points table for the Copa. However, all of the aforementioned statistics do exist on a WP page for the UEFA Champions League -- it's just that it's not on the main article page -- but it does have a "Main article" link on the main tournament page. The SuperLiga hasn't been around long enough nor the corresponding WP article long enough to warrant its own statistics and records page. That's why I think they're still relevant here on the main SuperLiga page. JohnnyPolo24 (talk) 19:04, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Again, all of the tables on the Copa Lib article, that both of us mentioned, would get my full support, but they are unnecessary at this point. When there's only be two tournaments, that information is easily available by looking at the table. I guess what I'm saying is that anything more than a goalscorers table would be nothing short of redundant, and this is a key part, for now. I fully support the inclusion of these tables, but when there is more than 4 things to look at. -- Grant .Alpaugh 22:28, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

SuperLiga vs CFU Club championship[edit]

How exactly are they related beside being completely different? By the fact that they restricted to their own sub-federations? Well CFU champions qualify to the Champions' League through that competition, so CFU competition is not really restricted the way SuperLiga is. So what is the relationship? The "no-relationship-whatsoever" relationship, or what? Aleksandr Grigoryev (talk) 05:31, 23 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]