Talk:Major professional sports leagues in the United States and Canada/Archive 3

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Since when are the CFL and MLS "Major"?

I've looked at the article occasionally and noticed today that a major change happened: the CFL and MLS - previously only noted under "other notable leagues" are now listed as "major". When did this happen? Was there a discussion somewhere that I missed, because I don't see it on this talk page? I don't understand how leagues generating revenues of less than a billion dollars could even remotely be considered "major". Otherwise any "top level" league in a sport would be "major" and we've clearly noted that the MLL/NLL are not major leagues. Starwrath (talk) 01:21, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

I still see them listed only under "other notable leagues" ... Where are you looking ? UrbanNerd (talk) 03:45, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

I can't see anywhere in the current article they are designated as a Major League except possibly where MLS is included in the "Revenue comparison" table. The article makes clear they are not currently considered Major League (although there isn't any definite financial threshold when a league suddenly becomes "Major". If the majority of RS began describing MLS as Major so should Wikipedia, whatever its annual revenue is). Lord Cornwallis (talk) 15:23, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

It looks like it was reverted a bit after I posted this. If you compare the March 8th version to the current you'll see what I'm talking about. Starwrath (talk) 21:01, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, I see what you mean. Anyway its fine now. Lord Cornwallis (talk) 23:39, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

MLS and CFL

MLS and CFL are most certainly major. Their attendance alone qualifies them. Both have higher per-game attendance than NBA and NHL while CFL is the 2nd most popular sports league in Canada. And how the heck do the AFL and MLL get mentioned before MLS in the opening paragraph and how is MLL mentioned and not NLL?Jntg4Games (talk) 22:12, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

To even consider that, you'd need to provide reliable sources indicating that the MLS and CFL are considered in the same strain as the big 4 leagues, and distinct from all the other leagues that exist. Making up our own criteria doesn't cut it, per WP:NOR.--Cúchullain ^t/c 13:06, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

Again, the big 4 leagues are an established concept; we'd need to see some sources that MLS and CFL are considered in that strain to say it. Otherwise it's original research. Please stop revert warring.--Cúchullain ^t/c 16:11, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

I haven't seen any relevant source saying that the Big 4 are the only major leagues... Jntg4Games (talk) 16:39, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

It's a problem of terminology. The concept of the big four leagues (MLB, NBA, NFL, and NHL) is very well established, as evidenced by current sources and very many others.[1][2][3][4]. Other leagues, including those that are ostensibly the "major league" of their respective sports, don't approach them in attendance, revenue, or viewership. This article as a whole is very poorly sourced and needs a complete overhaul and change of focus.--Cúchullain ^t/c 16:50, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

If the regular editors of this article aren't going to consider NASCAR on the basis of a methodology of gameplay that is not even mentioned anywhere in this article, and certainly isn't referenced, you've got no hope of getting anything else in Jntg4Games. You may as well give up, they are not interested in expanding the scope for any reason. This is despite the article being titled Major professional sports leagues all content is limited to a completely unreferenced concept of the big four. Personally, I'd like to see the article moved to a title reflecting this, for example Big Four professional sports leagues in the United States and Canada, because if that is the limiting criteria, then that is how the article should be titled. --Falcadore (talk) 20:45, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

I would agree with something along those lines. The big 4 is a well established concept; what constitutes "other notable leagues" is not at all established. As I said a while ago, I've never seen any source that takes as its subject "Major professional sports leagues in the United States and Canada".--Cúchullain ^t/c 20:52, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

Or, we could revise the scope of this article to include the classic Big Four, the two professional team sports league with higher attendance per game than the NBA and NHL (total attendance is not accurate for determining this, 30 MLB teams play 162 games while just 19 MLS teams play 34 games, etc.), and redefine the scope to include NASCAR. Leagues like the UFL, NLL, AFL, WNBA, and MLL (WPS isn't even playing this year... and only had a 3K/gm attendance last year) are less relevant. We can keep the Big Four in a category, but also include MLS, CFL, and NASCAR perhaps? Jntg4Games (talk) 21:04, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

As regular editors are openly hostile towards this concept, it's like to move this article first to a "Big Four" titled version since that's their criteria, thus providing them an article with which they can keep to the Big Four concept before re-establishing a Major article with content reflecting the much more inclusive title of "Major". That way everyone should be happy. Might start the requested move process later today. The scope doesn't need to be redefined I feel as the big four concept is not currently mentioned or referenced anywhere in the articles current scope. --Falcadore (talk) 21:10, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

The potential alternative is to AfD the article as WP:OR? --Falcadore (talk) 21:13, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

A rewrite and retitling would be superior. As I've said repeatedly, I've seen no sources that take as their subject the "major professional sports leagues in the United States and Canada", and while the "Big 4" is a well established concept attested in many sources, what constitutes the "other notable leagues" is not established. The article is very poor right now.--Cúchullain ^t/c 12:17, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

Additionally, having a separate article on whatever individual editors decide count as "Major Leagues" would have the same problem with original research as this one does.--Cúchullain ^t/c 12:19, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

Or we can have a separate article on professional sports leagues that average over 15,000 fans in attendance per game, without calling it major... or rename this article to that and eliminate NLL, AFL, WNBA, and MLL. Not original research then, just a set criteria for inclusion as we aren't calling them major. Jntg4Games - Not Logged In — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.150.240.129 (talk) 14:10, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

Again, unless you have sources that take as their subject "professional sports leagues that average over 15,000 fans in attendance per game", it's a violation of WP:NOR and WP:NOTABILITY. The productive thing to do will be to find sources first, and then build an article around that.--Cúchullain ^t/c 19:00, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: not moved -- JHunterJ (talk) 13:21, 28 April 2012 (UTC)

---

Major professional sports leagues in the United States and Canada → "Big 4" sports leagues in the United States and Canada – As a group of regular editors are aginast the addition of any professional sports league that does not meet a certain criteria that is not mentioned anywhere in the article I propose moving the article to the current title as that appears to be a more specific version of the criteria that editors agree on and is actually reflective of what content in included and excluded. --Falcadore (talk) 03:42, 21 April 2012 (UTC)

• Oppose the "Big 4" are the major leagues. Plus, this nomination seems sort of pointy. Hot Stop 15:11, 21 April 2012 (UTC)
  • I agree with your comment on the tone of the nomination, but there may be some merit here. The problem with the term "major leagues" is that it more often refers to the highest-level league in a particular sport, rather than to the "Big 4" American sports leagues. With the current title, were I not already aware of this article's scope, I would expect it to be about the following leagues (all and only): NFL, MLB, NHL, NBA, CFL, MLS, NLL, MLL, WNBA, WPS, and CWHL/WWHL. Powers ^T 02:52, 22 April 2012 (UTC)
    • If it was referenced probably or titled properly there would be no reason for the move request. If major is accurate for the big four and nobody else, then establish that. Presently the article does not. I personally find the excuse that NASCAR is excluded because it is not an "interdependent team sport" is particularly weak when that concept is not mentioned anywhere in the article. I find the policy on the run, verging on bias. When the article is titled major but the contents align to big four rather than major it speaks to accuracy of the title and/or contents. Accuracy is hardly making a point. --Falcadore (talk) 13:50, 22 April 2012 (UTC)
• Oppose to the move, but ok about create another article about the "Big 4"; we can have a article about DC Universe and another about Batman and Robin or Europe and Western Europe--Feroang (talk) 03:29, 22 April 2012 (UTC)
  • I think Falcadore's point is that this is already that article. If we did what you propose, we'd have to expand this article's content, and the new article's content would largely be copied from here. Doesn't it make more sense to rename this one and create a new article for all major leagues in the U.S. and Canada? Powers ^T 14:27, 22 April 2012 (UTC)
• Comment. This article is currently a shambles and I doubt this name change would help. The idea is basically good - the big four sports leagues are a well established and documented concept, and the article should be about that rather than a poorly defined heap of original research about "major leagues". But the proper solution will be to locate actual sources and do a complete overhaul (there's little salvageable here). As another note, the significance of NASCAR, golf, and potentially MLS, the CFL, and defunct leagues like the AFL, ABA, and WHA could and should be discussed in an article on the four primary leagues.--Cúchullain ^t/c 12:41, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Strata

I would imagine that the Canadian Football League and Major League Soccer are far more popular than the other "notable" leagues listed. Putting them in the same category as Major League Lacrosse is absurd. 50.74.174.58 (talk) 15:55, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

I've found a couple of articles that show MLS in both 2011 and 2012 had higher average attendance than both the NBA and NHL. With this information should this move MLS up to a "Big Five"? I didn't want to make this kind of change, or even add these references, without a group consensus. Zooando (talk) 00:19, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

Zooando, Take a look at previous discussions on this Talk page that address your question about whether Major League Soccer should be classified as one of the "big" or "major" leagues. The consensus was "no". Attendance on par with the NBA and NHL is not enough by itself; MLS would need to show significant improvements in revenues and TV coverage too. Feel free to add your references, though, into the article in the existing section on Attendance. Barryjjoyce (talk) 03:36, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

References

National Women's Soccer League

As the highest level of women's soccer in North America, should the National Women's Soccer League be added to the Other Notable League's section, right below the WNBA? Zooando (talk) 00:34, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

Eh, let's hold off until after it actually starts, at least. WP:CRYSTALBALL and all that. It may not turn out to be anything all that notable and be gone in a year. The other "other notable leagues" at least have been around for a while. oknazevad (talk) 05:33, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

Complete rewrite

This article is a disaster. It's like a long defense on why the NFL, MLB, NBA and NHL are the "big 4" and the justification on why everyone else isn't. However, there are countless references elsewhere that clearly define what the "big 4" is; or more exactly the "big 4" collectively and not singly, as what has happened here. Let's start from that and end with references saying that specific x league isn't. User:Howard the Duck 19:55, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

Is the "Big 4" concept in Canada as well, or should it be excluded and limited to USA. The article currently says the Canadian Football League "has the third highest average attendance of the northern North American leagues". AFAIK, NFL, NBA, MLB, and NHL are thought of as Big 4 in US. I sometimes see research that Major League Soccer might have surpassed one or the other in TV ratings or attendance, but it would be WP:OR to say that MLS is though of as big 4 (yet).—Bagumba (talk) 20:31, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

FYI, Talk:Jason_Collins#Major_North_American_teams has identified a bunch of articles that refer to big 4.—Bagumba (talk) 21:22, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

There must be news articles about sports and business where the Big 4 are discussed as a collective unit; there might be even instances when a league executive refers to a "Big 4", implying that the "Big 4" recognize each other as the "Big 4". Once we have like 5 articles about that, we can look for other articles that suggest additions to the "Big 4", and finally articles that explicitly state that the specific x league is in the "Big 4". Think of it as recognition of states. As long as the "Big 4" doesn't recognize "you are one of us", it shouldn't get in even if it has massive attendance and earnings. –HTD 04:46, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

Agreed. The core of the article should be about the recognized Big 4, with a smaller section for sources that claim that MLS or CFL should in there.—Bagumba (talk) 23:28, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

NFL TV revenues

Just noticed that it is only listing $200m/yr, which is just the NBC contract I believe ($2 billion over 10 years). While other leagues probably get some Canadian TV revenue that isn't listed here, the NHL is getting shortchanged greatly by not including it, since I think that would probably at least double the TV revenue column for them (I think the NHL actually makes more on the Canadian TV). 184.18.141.32 (talk) 18:53, 28 November 2013 (UTC)

Lax and NWSL

The National Lacrosse League and Major League Lacrosse used to be here, but I guess someone deleted them. NLL does get better attendance figures than the AFL, with top teams routinely drawing more than 15K/game, sometimes as high as 19K/game (Buffalo and Colorado currently, Philadelphia and Toronto formerly) and the MLL is fairly popular in some markets as well. Don't get why they were removed while the AFL gets to stay.

Further, the WPS was listed before, but the National Women's Soccer League currently is not, despite being stronger overall and having a franchise, the Portland Thorns FC having the highest per-game attendance of any women's sports team in the United States (over 13K).

Perhaps this article would be best off including the Big 4 in one section as is status quo, and then having another section with "Other Top-Level Leagues" or something along those lines where the "Other Notable Leagues" section currently is for leagues that are the highest levels of play in the country for their respective sport, which would include all currently there, plus the aforementioned three, and maybe the Major Indoor Soccer League/Professional Arena Soccer League, World TeamTennis, National Pro Fastpitch, and Major League Ultimate/American Ultimate Disc League. Thoughts? Jackson Scofield (talk) 21:33, 22 December 2013 (UTC)

Jackson—A discussion of numerous semi-pro leagues does not belong on this page. If you want to write a short description of those leagues, perhaps the Sports in the United States page would be a good fit for that material. Barryjjoyce (talk) 03:05, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

I believe that the NWSL, MLL and NLL are clearly on a higher level than those other ones and actually worthy of mention. The other ones don't need to be here. Jackson Scofield (talk) 05:54, 20 January 2014 (UTC)

The NWSL is a new league, and if previous recent attempts to run women's pro soccer leagues are any guide, this league may not last long. MLL and NLL are semi-pro leagues, not fully professional (see the lead of the MLL article). They are not anywhere near major league status, as opposed to MLS and CFL, which some editors should be included in the "major leagues" designation. Again, if you want to write about semi-pro leagues, the Sports in the United States seems to be a better forum for that topic than this article about major leagues. Barryjjoyce (talk) 03:58, 24 January 2014 (UTC)

Delete AFL and WNBA?

The average salary in the NLL is $19,135, with a total cap of ~$400,000: [5].

AFL players make $14,940 per year: [6]. The WNBA's salary cap is $913,000: [7]. These numbers are comparable (or smaller) than the NLL. I tend to agree that we should exclude fringe leagues from this article, but if that's what we're going to do, then we need to do it consistently. I'm going to remove the AFL and WNBA. TDL (talk) 07:26, 24 January 2014 (UTC)

I agree with removing the AFL from this article for the reasons stated and the supporting evidence in the article, which clearly shows that AFL is semi-pro, not a fully professional league.

As for the WNBA, however, the WNBA average salary is $72,000, which seems like a professional league. I don't have a strong view whether the WNBA should go or stay, but perhaps it's something worth of discussion. (I realize an editor has already deleted the WNBA section). Barryjjoyce (talk) 02:30, 25 January 2014 (UTC)

I restored the WNBA, with citations identifying it as a major professional sports league. -- JHunterJ (talk) 15:06, 5 February 2014 (UTC)

Well the Conference Board of Canada considers the NLL to be a "Major League Canadian Professional Sports" so if we're going to base it on sources referring to it as Major Pro then it should be included as well. According to the source cited by Barryjjoyce, the WNBA's minimum salary is $36,570. "Nearly every WNBA player competes abroad in the offseason to help boost her finances". Is the WNBA really fully pro if all players must get other jobs in the off season? TDL (talk) 18:46, 5 February 2014 (UTC)

I think using reliable sources is the way to go. Is there a reliable source that gives a minimum minimum salary to count? Or that draws the line at holding other jobs? (Serious question -- I don't know what makes a professional sports league "major".) -- JHunterJ (talk) 18:50, 5 February 2014 (UTC)

Yes it would certainly help if we had a source which gave a clear definition. That part of my comment was in response to Barryjjoyce above who was drawing a distinction between semi-pro and fully pro. Oxford dictionaries defines semi-professional to mean "receiving payment for an activity but not relying entirely on it for a living". TDL (talk) 19:24, 5 February 2014 (UTC)

Clarification needed (probably minor)

This article currently contains the sentence: "MLS has 19 teams as of 2014 — 16 in the United States and 3 in Canada — and will grow to 20 teams in 2015 with the addition of two expansion teams." This needs clarification, because that math doesn't work. Either one (or more) of those numbers is incorrect, or a team is folding and it isn't mentioned here. I don't know which as I don't follow MLS, in fact I don't remember why I'm even reading this article, I just happened to notice the discrepancy. 50.72.201.97 (talk) 10:33, 12 January 2015 (UTC)

"major league"

After streamlining and reorg by User:Clarityfiend today, the WP:DISAMBIG page Major (disambiguation) no longer targets this page --nor Major League Soccer, only MLB-- as did the preceding version.

Offhand I consider that an improvement. This article doesn't show that the term "major league" (nor "the majors") is used in regarding major professional sports leagues. I doubt that its use is established outside baseball (where its scope is greater than, because it predates, the organization Major League Baseball). So the word "major" in this pagename --and the MLS pagename-- isn't "major" in the sense of the disambiguation page.

--P64 (talk) 01:49, 24 March 2015 (UTC)

Beginnings

One thing I don't think is clear in the article: Did the four major sports leagues become "major" sports leagues at some point in time? Or were they always major sports leagues? In looking at the history of the four leagues, the NHL under the Original Six period had only six teams from the 1940s until the 1960s before a period of rapid expansion. Similarly, the NBA had eight teams during the 1950s into the early 1960s before a period of rapid expansion. Did both of these leagues become major leagues with expansion in the 1960s? I have a hard time thinking of a six-team league or an eight-team league as a "major" professional league, at least as we use that term today. CUA 27 (talk) 07:08, 19 December 2015 (UTC)

"As we use the term today" is the key part of your statement. In a past era, six teams was considered fine for the NHL; indeed the smaller number of teams was seen as a way to ensure only the most elite players were in the league. We cannot use modern standards to judge past major league status. Though you do bring up a fair point about popularity growth and how that affects major league status. Remember that during those periods when the leagues had fewer teams, there were fewer people in the US and Canada, they were more concentrated in the northeast, sports weren't as major a business, and what sports were popular were quite different. Boxing used to be the king of sports before corruption became rampant and watered down titles to meaningless drivel. so yes, the NHL was major even with only 6 teams, because it was the highest level of a popular sport in the densely populated northeastern part of the continent, during the time when that was appropriate. oknazevad (talk) 17:02, 28 January 2016 (UTC)

[Belated reply] Oknazevad — Your point re judging leagues historical position by the standards of the day and not by modern standards makes sense. Back when NHL and NBA were 6 and 8 teams respectively, the NFL and MLB had double digit teams, so it still seems an open question whether a league that was 1/2 or 1/3 the size of other major leagues is itself major. Indeed back in the 1960s-70s, the NBA and NHL arguably had much in common with the now defunct NASL — fewer than 10 teams in the 1960s, faced with competition from upstart rival leagues they respond with rapid expansion and some relocations, leading to significant financial pressures during the 1970s, etc. It's fair to argue that NBA and NHL weren't truly major league until the NBA vanquished the ABA, and the NHL vanquished the WHA & WHL.
Also, to pick up on your point re changing of sports popularity over time, that's the crux of what I'm getting at. We're looking at an article that discusses the four major leagues today, but the article discusses them as if they were always majors, and doesn't clearly spell out what events happened during what time period that helped catapult them into major league status. I don't have any concrete suggestions right now on how to change the article — other than polishing up the "Weathering challenges from rival leauges" section — but am interested in your thoughts as to whether the article could/should be improved to address the question of a league developing into a major league. CUA 27 (talk) 01:28, 1 September 2016 (UTC)

Hm, I don't think that those mergers can be said to be the threshold for major status, to be honest.

Firstly, despite the small size and narrow(ish) footprint, the major status of the NHL far predates the formation and later absorption of teams from the WHA; this is evidenced by the decades worth of coverage in newspapers from before that era. The NHL was the major league of hockey, but hockey was played in far more than just those 6 cities. Hockey to this day does have a well developed farm system second only to baseball in its scope. The NHL was just kept fewer teams at the top level, somewhat intentionally; the "Original 6" era, misnomer that it is, wasn't exactly known for being transparent with the conflicts of interests that most owners had. Nor were they welcoming of new owners, like the long frustrations to get a team in Philadelphia. The 1967 expansion wasn't a case of a league suddenly becoming major because it now had enough teams, it was a case where the owners of a major league didn't want to expand because they didn't want to share the pie with others even though the pie would grow larger with the league. The demand was there and once the new generation of owners realized it the acted quickly. Maybe too quickly, but still.

As for the formation of rival leagues, that was usually a market reaction to the established league becoming popular enough that others thought that there was money to be made in that sport and the existing league was reluctant to expand. That's exactly what prompted Lamar Hunt to form the AFL in the first place. That those rival leagues formed in relatively quick succession of each other (AFL 1960, ABA 1967, WHA 1972) was because they were directly influenced by the others (and in some cases had some of the same owners). And they weren't the first rival league for each of them, anyway. The AFL was the fourth league by that name, and there was the AAFC. The NHL dealt with early rivals, such as the PCHL. And the NBA itself was formed by the merger of rival leagues (the NBL and BAA). So rival leagues aren't a point where a league becomes major, but their existence over the years does show that these sports are major.

To a large extent all of those leagues also coincide with the increased importance of tv rights as a source of league avenue, too. Indeed, even the NHL's 67 expansion was prompted in part by the TV networks wanting the league to add teams in additional markets. But they already are major leagues, hence why there even was interest from the TV networks in the first place. So I don't think we can really pick any particular date as definitive as to when each became major based on those factors. It almost seems too subjective for us to state any dates definitively. oknazevad (talk) 06:57, 1 September 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 3 external links on Major professional sports leagues in the United States and Canada. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20090206114301/http://www.theglobeandmail.com:80/servlet/story/RTGAM..wsurvey8/BNStory/Sports/home to http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM..wsurvey8/BNStory/Sports/home
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20060420233048/http://www.euroleague.net:80/noticia.jsp?temporada=E04&jornada=33&id=130 to http://www.euroleague.net/noticia.jsp?temporada=E04&jornada=33&id=130
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20080207065606/http://www.neworleanssaints.com:80/Articles/2008/2/London%20Calling.aspx to http://www.neworleanssaints.com/Articles/2008/2/London%20Calling.aspx

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 13:40, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Major professional sports leagues in the United States and Canada. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130910061944/http://www.conferenceboard.ca/reports/briefings/bigleagues/briefing-1.aspx to http://www.conferenceboard.ca/reports/briefings/bigleagues/briefing-1.aspx
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.newyorkjets.com/team/history?year=1962
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.newyorkjets.com/team/history?year=1963
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150526031515/http://www.athleticbusiness.com:80/more-news/strike-threatens-canadian-football-league-2014-season-br.html to http://www.athleticbusiness.com/more-news/strike-threatens-canadian-football-league-2014-season-br.html
• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.nfl.com/international/story/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:48, 1 January 2017 (UTC)

Simpler name change

Instead of the current name why don't we simplify it? All the major sports leagues involved in this title (MLB, NBA, NFL and NHL) all presently have member teams in the United States of America or Canada (save the NFL), which is why the current title exists. How about instead a simple adjective to cover this simple definition: "American-Canadian major professional sports leagues"? It's more direct and simpler. "American-Canadian" is a demographic well-defined and inclusive as well as exclusive. I believe this is more logical and makes sense. Any opinions? Banan14kab (talk) 02:26, 3 April 2017 (UTC)

Better to use the country names than the denonyms, for specificity. It's the standard for articles on sports organizations. Sports people get denonyms, not leagues. oknazevad (talk) 02:36, 3 April 2017 (UTC)

Ok that is understandable. Perhaps a rephrase such as "United States & Canada major professional sport leagues". It still covers everything in the article with a less lengthy title. Banan14kab (talk) 06:42, 5 April 2017 (UTC)

Two short words, a preposition and a definite article, aren't worth worrying about. oknazevad (talk) 11:19, 5 April 2017 (UTC)

That's not the issue. I'm talking strictly about grammar and usage. It's kinda awkwardly worded. The first sentence in the article is even: "The major professional sports leagues in the United States and Canada are the highest professional competitions of team sports in the United States and Canada.". I just think there is a better, more accurate way to title the inclusiveness of these leagues. Banan14kab (talk) 22:36, 5 April 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Major professional sports leagues in the United States and Canada. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090220080154/http://vault.sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vault/article/magazine/MAG1070137/index.htm to http://vault.sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vault/article/magazine/MAG1070137/index.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20141006155744/http://www.ibaf.org/en/infopage-detail.aspx?id=72ac735a-33d5-45b6-a99d-23e44243f427 to http://www.ibaf.org/en/infopage-detail.aspx?id=72ac735a-33d5-45b6-a99d-23e44243f427

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:30, 30 May 2017 (UTC)

Format style

Even if double-digit and above numbers should almost be represented by numerals, single-digit numbers in most contexts (not ordinals, scores, or anything similar) need to be represented by words, even if it results in a sentence where there is a mixture of numerals and spelled-out single-digit numbers. 2600:1004:B16A:54EA:6045:4427:A702:3FC4 (talk) 00:18, 29 August 2017 (UTC)

Actually, not on Wikipedia. Per WP:NUMNOTES, "Comparable quantities should be all spelled out or all in figures: five cats and thirty-two dogs, not five cats and 32 dogs." - BilCat (talk) 00:25, 29 August 2017 (UTC)

MLR?

Will we ever add the MLR on here? for people that don't know, MLR is major league rugby, it isn't very popular but it is the highest level of rugby in the united states and Canada, and it's listed under major league in some city sports Wikipedia pages, like the Houston sport teams wiki. It was created in 2017, so I think that's the reason it isn't popular, as well as the fact that they can't play in quarantine, put it is still a major league sport according to Merriam-Websters dictionary. I also don't fully understand why stuff like the WNBA is excluded, it is listed as major league in some cities sport wiki's as well, but maybe you consider that there already is another league that plays the same sport and don't consider gender a strong enough case for being major league. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Big the big big man the man the man (talk • contribs) 13:59, 10 September 2020 (UTC)

Although it's gained some popularity, MLR is not major despite its name. (Neither is Major League Lacrosse). It's covered at Professional sports leagues in the United States, which is sufficient. oknazevad (talk) 14:30, 10 September 2020 (UTC)

Two-conference system

It seems to me that the two-conference system is an integral part of American sports. Has anything been written on this phenomenon? Palnatoke (talk) 13:03, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

That's a general aspect of professional sports league organization, and is mentioned at that article. The conferences are basically a way to group the geographic divisions (which themselves are necessitated by the large, multiple-time-zone spanning area of the US and Canada), though MLB and the NFL's conferences being not geographical are also a nod to the historical roots of those leagues as being formed from the merger of two leagues that both had similar national footprints. Conversely the CFL's divisions were originally separate regional leagues. The NHL, NBA, and MLS are just convenient geographic groupings. oknazevad (talk) 16:54, 29 September 2020 (UTC)