Earlier this summer, news broke that the North American Soccer League may file an anti-trust lawsuit against the US Soccer Federation. They believe that proposed changes to Division 1 standards make it impossible for NASL, or anyone else, to achieve that status to compete directly with Major League Soccer. New York Cosmos COO Erik Stover spoke with Dave Martinez of Empire of Soccer about where things stand.

It makes for some fascinating reading.

Current make up of Division 1 and 2 status

There has been a lot said about this lawsuit and what it could mean. Before we get into the specifics of the update, a few reminders. NASL is currently a Division 2 league with waivers granted to them by USSF since they don't mean the standards for that classification at the moment. They have until 2017 to meet all standards or they could lose their Division 2 standing. It was also reported that NASL applied for Division 1 status earlier this year, but was told to wait by USSF. It's thought that their application was put on hold because the federation was undergoing updates to the standards of Division 1.

Their beef is with the changes to the Division 1 standards. The requirements include having at least 16 clubs, the population required (75% of clubs in 1 million MSA to 2 million) and stadiums that must seat at least 15,000. They claim that those changes make it impossible for anyone to ever compete with MLS and indeed, they're made with the explicit idea to keep NASL from competing as they are on the edge of doing so, they claim.

It's interesting that NASL applied for Division 1 status considering that one of their clubs is set to join MLS (Minnesota United), two others are on shaky ground (Carolina Railhawks and Atlanta Silverbacks) while many of the rest have said they wish to join MLS one day soon (indeed, one of their franchises is actively seeking a move in the form of the San Antonio Scorpions). It's also worth pointing out that NASL doesn't meet Division 1 standards even before the alleged changes.

What has hapened is that NASL claims they have investors who will give them the means to compete with MLS if only they had Division 1 sanctioning. This sounds rather dubious, but is entirely plausible.

Now, on to Mr Stover's interview. He said that the proposed changes "are crazy." He cited the Barclays Premier League and La Liga as examples of that craziness, pointing out that they would fait to meet USSF's new standards. He would be correct, but it's a bad point to make. A better analogy would be to compare all of Europe to USSF. Considering the population differences, landmass and just the sheer amount of markets available to the United States, the standards should match that.

A more apt example would be standards for a Division 1 league based solely in New York state.

Stover does bring up a valid point that most would agree with on principle: “How can we ever be first division if you keep changing the rules and your committee is made up of nine people from the MLS, someone from the USL, three from the Women’s league and [NASL Commissioner] Bill Peterson?” Stover said.

There should have been better representation on the US Soccer Board, but there is an issue that hasn't been brought up.

Traffic Sports.

NASL is still owned by Traffic in the form of Category B stock (ie, non team owner stocks); they also own the Railhawks. It's unlikely US Soccer wants to have any closer ties to a potentially criminal organization involved in money laundering, fraud, bribery and who knows what else. It's also likely the reason why USSF has been so hesitant to host the Copa America Centenario, despite the obvious financial benefits. They know that Loretta Lynch is watching. The last thing they can afford is to bring the investigation into their circle. It's already hit NASL hard with the arrest of Aron Davidson, Traffic Sports USA and Traffic Sports itself.

Stover told Empire of Soccer that USSF and MLS planted an article in the New York Times about fan protests going on at Railhawk matches. The article in question is this one. It's unlikely that USSF or MLS need to do much to draw attention to Traffic as their dealings have done that aplenty and can be read in full in the Department of Justice report. The mere fact that NASL continues to do business with an outlaw organization would naturally lead to fans worrying about the fate of their club.

Stover highlighted the power of attorney Jeffrey Kessler, who recently helped NFL quarterback Tom Brady with his PR fight against the NFL. He also unsuccessfully fought MLS while representing the Players Union around the turn of the century. It's that connection that has sparked several theories about NASL's plans. Everything from tin hat to plausible.

What the interview did more than anything is show that this move does seem to be precipitated by the New York Cosmos desire to be Division 1 and reap all the rewards that may come from that. They had a chance to join MLS at one point but declined (over the rights to their brand). This is looking more and more as buyer's remorse in not joining MLS and seeing their value grow at an incredible pace.

Does this mean MLS and USSF aren't colluding in some way? Not at all. This writer wouldn't be surprised if they were working closely together. In a grand conspiracy to rid the world of NASL? Unlikely. More like they want no part of Traffic Sports, especially now that the DoJ is actively investigating FIFA and all of its confederations and federations.

As of this writing, NASL has not filed any lawsuit though they have forced discussions with USSF. Also as of this writing, no changes have been brought forth to the USSF board regarding divisional standards. Ideas have been kicked around but nothing has been voted upon.

If the Cosmos are the primary backers of this move, with several other clubs one step out the door one way or the other and expansion iffy, one has to wonder how far the league is willing to take this and ultimately what their end goal is. For now, fans just want to see soccer being played.