Old MLS

[Marcos]

Yes, but you questioned why Bradley moved to Germany when it would have been "better" for him to stay in the US, which in my view it wouldn't have been. The MLS is always going to have this problem, as the holy grail of football occurs within the European leagues. Seriously, is it better for him to be playing in Germany against teams like Bayern Munich and Werder Bremen, against some of the best in the world, than against teams like LA Galaxy or D.C United? Looking at your league and the squads within it, I can only see it as a place for the big guys to earn their last pay day, or for the youngsters to build up their footballing knowledge before moving abroad. The other players in between these ages are just there because they aren't good enough to play abroad.

The MLS is not going to become a major sport in the US because you rate it as maybe fourth most popular sport, whereas in Europe and South America, where it's considered the best, it is the number one sport. It can never be seen a major thing in the US because of how it rates against the other sports.

[HailtotheYo]

The MLS is not going to become a major sport in the US because you rate it as maybe fourth most popular sport, whereas in Europe and South America, where it's considered the best, it is the number one sport. It can never be seen a major thing in the US because of how it rates against the other sports.

Considering his playing time ..... I'm not so sure about Bradley but he was just an example of the type of American player I'm referring too. I get that the top teir guys (Howard etc) will move on and I don't blame them, nor do I have a problem with it. But it's the Bradley's of American soccer that I'm looking at. Hell Guzan is another example. WTF good is it him to ride the pine behind Friedel at Villa ? At least here he'd be playing. And yes I'd say for that "second" teir of American player that it would be better for them to stay at home and actually play rather than go abroad and be a reserve player - occasional sub at best. In this instance the level of the league is taken out of the equation due to the fact that the playing time doesn't warrant gaining the value of it as opposed to actually playing here in the MLS.

^ that second point there is a yes and no proposition. I know that soccer won't ever be the most popular sport in the US. It is however, gaining ground rapidly. I'd already put it above hockey here in overall appeal. Casual fans are turning away from the MLB and NBA due to constant issues with the sport. Can the MLS take them over anytime soon ? No, but the appeal of the sport is catching on. Teams are lining up around the corner to get a franchise. Just because it won't ever be number one doesn't mean it can't be big. The league averages 16,429 per game for a sport that isn't even popular over here .... think about that. I mean hell, the league isn't even 15 years old.

You pointed to South America where soccer is the number one (and virtually only) sport. The MLS consistantly fields teams that are on par with the majority of the South American counterparts. DC United alone has a very good track record in International Club competitions (which are directly contested in CONCACAF).

Again, the question I'm posting is one of what the MLS can do in order to show actually playing in the league is better for these "mid teir" / "questionable" American players as opposed to going abroad and being a novelty/getting virtually no time. Seriously, what good is it doing Adu/Altidore/Bradley/ect ?

[Szumi]

Bradley lit it up last year at Heerenveen, and while the the Netherlands League isn't an elite league, it is respectable. He's only 21 and does have some talent, to be fair.

For the MLS, the first thing they need to do is get rid of the tight restrictions on the salary cap. That is a terrible idea, in my opinion. It's not bad to have a salary cap, but theirs is too strict. Football is a business, and if players can't get decent wages, they won't want to come to America to play.

Also, they should not put a limit on the amount of international players that a team can have. That's a terrible idea to have. It restricts non-Americans from coming into the MLS, and it prevents the league from getting more mainstream and worldwide exposure.

The designated player is a good idea and a step in the right direction, as has been said, but will eventually have to be done away with in time once more talented stars want to come.

Also, they need to get a better TV deal. They get, what, one game a week on ESPN2? Not very good for mainstream viewership, if you ask me.

[Dan]

Guzan is 13 years younger then Friedel.

I'm sure Villa have brought him in as a successor to Friedel and being #2 to one of the best American 'keepers to play in England will only help him progress and settle in England.

[HailtotheYo]

Well, the crux with the international players on these teams, is that the more you let on the less American players you'll have in the league. The MLS is an American league and should be made up of majority American players. As it stands right now, each team can get 7 internationals on their team (4 senior and 3 junior). By letting international players overrun the league, it would out right defeat what the MLS was created for (harvest and promote American soccer). At the same time though, it's hard for the league to gain validity without the international players.

As for the salary cap, again it's a crux. The league's business model was great at its inception and has allowed the league to survive. I agree that the "salary cap" prohibits growth to an extent but it allows each team to be competitive in the MLS. The last thing the MLS can afford, is to give some "free reign" and immediately have 4/5 of the teams completely sperate themselves from the rest of the league.

With Guzan, what's the point of riding the pine for what 2/3 more years ? Friedel said he's playing out his contract with Villa, so that leaves Guzan on the bench. Yes, being around and practicing with upper caliber players is good but I highly doubt it's better than actually playing in a game. Bradley indeed did tear up the Netherlands League, but as you said Szumi it isn't exactly elite.

Meh, it's frustrating.

[Szumi]

While I agree if internationals flood the MLS then the focus of the American player goes down, but on the flip side, apart from having more talent in the league, the more development the American players can have. If they can bring in enough international talents to help develop the players while keeping the ratio balanced, then I can see it being successful.

The American soccer players are not as skilled as the premier soccer nations. When we played Spain and England, we were outclassed on every level. We need the younger MLS players to get tutelage from Beckham, Blanco, Schletteo, and other international players with more skill and knowledge of the game, while players overseas (Dempsey, Guzan, Bradley, Altidore, Adu, Edu, etc.) can learn from the vast amount of skilled and experienced players there.

The salary cap, I agree, has been vital to keeping MLS afloat in its early stages. But as the league grows more profitable and successful, lesser restrictions need to be put in order. Before this can happen though, all the teams need to have private, financially fit owners. Right now, I believe MLS still owns 2 of the active teams (no clue which two, can't remember at all), but once those 2 teams have owners that have some money to them, then, lesser restrictions so there is more of an equal playing field.

The thing I still think MLS needs the most is better TV coverage. I know they get a guaranteed Thursday night game on ESPN 2 and a Saturday night game on Fox Soccer Channel. They might have a Saturday or Sunday game on ESPN2, but I'm not sure. However, FSC is only on certain satelite/dish deals, so that isn't easily and openly accessible to people; not a lot of viewers there. ESPN2 gives them access, but not enough. Apart from Thursday, they need to push to get a guaranteed timeslot for Saturday (mid-afternoon or early evening) and Sunday (Sunday early-afternoon). More coverage, more revenue, more profits, more prestige. MLS is finally getting paid for coverage instead of having to pay for their games, which is awesome (just ask Paul Heyman). However, despite it being a monumental step, it's only the first.

[RazorsEdge]

With Guzan, what's the point of riding the pine for what 2/3 more years ? Friedel said he's playing out his contract with Villa, so that leaves Guzan on the bench. Yes, being around and practicing with upper caliber players is good but I highly doubt it's better than actually playing in a game. Bradley indeed did tear up the Netherlands League, but as you said Szumi it isn't exactly elite.

Manuel Almunia is now the number 1 at Arsenal after sitting on the bench for something like 4 years. I can't see it doing anything but helping Guzan. It will allow him to learn, fill in in stuff like cup matches to get experience and fill in if Friedel's injured, to show whether he can handle top flight football.

[HailtotheYo]

Absolutely, the ratio is the most important part of the International Player issue. It HAS to be balanced.

I agree with you 100% that minus say the top 5% of our players, we fall drastically short on talent when compared to the rest of the world. Your examples though, pointed to the exact problem I was talking about. Yes, our younger players need to gain the wisdom/experiences/etc from the class internationals we have here. As you went on, you named Altidore, Adu, Bradley .... our young stars. Now, Kljestan is rumored to be moving abroad. They aren't here. See ? This is the exact issue I'm trying to get at.

With the salary cap, yes the time has come to move on. As with the DP rule. Right now they're intertwined because at the moment 400K$ of the DP salary hits the cap (and 325K$ of the secondary DP). With monies coming in from TV revenue now and ticket sales going up there are income streams that are steady. You don't have to blow the roof off the cap, but raise it a percentage per year for the next five and then adjust accordingly. As for the DP's ... why not give a flat rate on their salary that goes to the cap ? I mean look at what 5% does. Beckham ? He'd only count 275K to the cap instead of 400K. That alone gives you 125K an in the MLS that's huge. It's just an initial thought, but it's something.

The TV coverage is touchy because they are just now getting the revenue. Yeah, the Thursday Night game is GREAT. Getting one during the day on the weekend though ? Ugh, you compete with college football and the NFL during the fall. That's suicide. At the start of the season it'd be great. Keep the Thursday game where it is. Get Fox Soccer Channel to continue it's coverage (it came in the sports package I got with Comcast for 5$ - and GolTV too). But a time slot is the biggest deal right now for the MLS. It does nothing if you have a great one all year and then have it shit on in "crunch time" thanks to the two biggest TV ratings sports wise in America starting up.

[Clawson]

WE GOT DERO! WE GOT DERO! WE GOT DERO! WE GOT DERO! WE GOT DERO! WE GOT DERO! WE GOT DERO! WE GOT DERO! WE GOT DERO! WE GOT DERO!

[Guest Mr. Potato Head]

This is the greatest day in the history of everything

[King Ellis]

WE GOT DERO! WE GOT DERO! WE GOT DERO! WE GOT DERO! WE GOT DERO! WE GOT DERO! WE GOT DERO! WE GOT DERO! WE GOT DERO! WE GOT DERO!

How is this different to posting HULL HULL HULL :/

[Clawson]

Because DeRo>Hull.

[HailtotheYo]

Wow, that's a kick ass move by Toronto. And WTF Houston ? JJ and some allocation money .... clearly insider trading.

Figures, the only team in the MLS that's trying is in Canada

[Clawson]

Well one could argue we're the only team in the MLS with a fanbase that tries to be European.

[Guest Mr. Potato Head]

because most of them are!

lol, immigrants

[Clawson]

I was reading the Red Patch Boys board and they were dreaming of del Piero as the DP with deRo.

lol, Italians

[HailtotheYo]

Well one could argue we're the only team in the MLS with a fanbase that tries to be European.

Yeah well that's not entirely fair either though because nobody in "America" wants to be European That, and we put FC and REAL and UNITED in our club names ........ ...... ...... >_<

Seriously though, the best moves by an MLS team not in Toronto are by the brand new Seattle club. That says something and it ain't good.

[Clawson]

The "FC" and "Real" are good moves. The nicknames just make the MLS look even more mickey mouse compared to other leagues around the world.

[gunnar hendershow]

DC United always have and always will have the best name in MLS.

[HailtotheYo]

The "FC" and "Real" are good moves. The nicknames just make the MLS look even more mickey mouse compared to other leagues around the world.

I was just being sarcastic with the comment, however this is an issue that the MLS faces though. While in the soccer community (and for the fans that get it) "FC" "REAL" "UNITED" and the like ARE good moves and lend to favorable sight from Europe etc. Here though, people just point and laugh at "the american soccer team trying to sound cool" ...

BUT

when you have teams named in the traditional American way (nicknames) they look as you said, Mickey Mouse. I find that kind of hypocritical because many major clubs do indeed have nicknames. "Gunners" "Blues" "Latics" "Magpies" "Hoops" and yeah it goes on. How is that different ? What, because we don't say Arsenal Gunners, but rather Arsenal it's ok ? I mean, if we just referred to them as Kansas City but not the Kansas City Wizards that would work ? I think it's just a load of crap really.