Which over the next 3-5 years at least, would mean a much less American league. Sure, a commitment to getting better players will bring home a handful of Yanks who are better than MLSers they'll replace. Not including guys like Daniel Williams and Terrence Boyd, who don't have any special reason to come to MLS, probably between 1 and 2 players per team. And that's a step in the right direction. Further, MLS will bring in better Costa Ricans and Hondurans and Jamaicans. That's maybe another player per team. But if the owners are smart, they won't be giving 33% raises to run of the mill Americans to do the same job they're doing now, because that won't help TV ratings. And adding, say, 50 moderate-but-noticeable upgrades to a 20 team league isn't what the league is aiming at. Which means Chris Wingert and Chris Korb will become bench players at best and USLers at worst, while Chris Rolfe will become a substitute, and Chris Pontius will have to step up his game to justify his pay. Chris Klute should be OK. The reason is that they'll all face tougher competition from higher priced foreign talent. After 3-5 years, there's a chance that the youth academies will have the teams swimming in the caliber of talent that right now they'll have to import. But that's in the future. Maybe that's MLS' plan...they're setting the table for a significant upgrade in talent in a chase for TV revenue, but want to see if the youth academies can speed up the increase in the improvement of the American player rather than commit right now to importing the talent.
I'm not really sure there are 16-32 (1 to 2 per team) non-DP American players abroad that are really above replacement level for the Americans they would replace. Especially not ones that are overseas for the money and not the experience.
You're probably right, but I didn't want to low ball the number and have this descend into a discussion of how many good Yanks play abroad. The main point is that bringing home Yanks ain't gonna solve this problem. If this is the league's plan, it's going to mean noticeably fewer Yanks.
but it seems they mistakenly think they can do that with one Clint Dempsey playing with starter Patrick Ianni's and back up Zach Scott's, instead Dempsey playing with two Aurellian Collin's at starter, Ianni as a back up and Scott in D2.
i think that is fine ... whether you can get 1 overseas american back that is better than some 50k guy, and maybe keep one american guy by paying him 300k that would otherwise leave ... still better than not doing this. and if for a decade MLS has to have less (but better quality and better paid) americans and leave the "moderate journeyman" american to ply their trade in D2 (and jump up to MLS if they "breakout" late) who cares. MLS's first and foremost responsibility is to improve the quality and play of the league. developing americans and canadians is a 2nd and subservient goal to the first. and i am not convinced that less mediocre americans and better overall player quality restricting the americans in mls to the best of the best would even hinder usmnt/cnt player pool development ... it might do the exact opposite.
As to your main point...I think you're probably right, provided that MLS have a solid reserve league so that guys like Graham Zusi have a bit of time to prove they can be solid pros. As to another issue...I repped you for using "peddle" properly. However, here you used "less," which means that word should be functioning as an adverb modifying "mediocre." But I think you mean for it to be an adjective modifying "americans." But proper grammar is to use "fewer" instead of "less" when modifying plural nouns, so if that's what you mean, you're being unclear. In all sincerity, are you suggesting that MLS try to bring in "less mediocre" Americans, which would mean the marginal-but-slightly-better guys playing in Scandanavia or on boomerang teams between the 2nd and 3rd divisions of German football? Or do you mean a lower number of mediocre Americans? If it's the former, if I take you literally, that's the point I was trying to argue against in #326, that those guys may be high in number but they're really not good enough to change the league. In that case we disagree. If you meant "fewer" instead of "less" than we agree. @American Brummie
yes fewer mediocre americans in MLS wouldn't hurt development of the USMNT/CNT pool (as long as there is a D2/reserve structure that allows for a late bloomer to move up).
Fewer in quantity, less in quality! God dammit this will be my legacy in life. As to the substantive point, more guys playing more games provided competent coaching can only be a good thing, so I'm on board with any way that can happen. Reserve league? Partner with NASL? 162-game season?
basically if you summarize the current rules as Senior Roster: 12 "domestics" and 8 "foreign" i don't think flipping that to 8 "domestics" and 12 "foreign" would have any real negative impact on developing players for the USMNT/CNT. you still have a Developmental Roster: to give young domestic players under 24 protected spots so they can grow to the level of competing with the Senior Roster players. and i think any team in MLS could lose 4 Senior domestics, none of whom have any impact/shot/relationship to the USMNT/CNT and replace them with higher paid foreign players and that could improve the overall squad depth and quality. not as much as making it say 14 foreign and 6 domestic would but i think 12 foreign/8 domestic out of 1-20 strikes a good balance.
Remember that green card holders count as "domestic." There's no right answer; it's like trying to convince someone that your favorite flavor of ice cream is the best, when you're discussing to what extent MLS should just be as good as it can be, and to what extent it should try to develop the American player. Ole, I'm not saying you're wrong. But my taste would be to put more emphasis on developing the American player than you. Because of that, I think 8 are too few; with 12 foreigns, it wouldn't be long until many, many of the teams have 4-5 green card holders. Of course, 8 domestics in a 28 team league ain't the same as 8 in a 21 or even 24 team league. There are alot of variables.
I'm sure with the advent of the NASL and USL leagues coupled with the youth academies and the colleges, there will be plenty of room to sign domestic players. The problem is will they be ready for the MLS level? Not so sure. I've followed college soccer extensively in the last 5 years and there are only a handful of players that can make the direct jump but even 1-2 per team will help. I can not really comment on the NASL or USL/PDL leagues becuase I haven't seen enough of it but I think those leagues will be growing and they will definitely help some players who are on the cusp of being ok or even good MLS players who can possibly play 1-2 years in those leagues and make the move up to MLS. This happens the whole world over where younger 3rd and 4th division players , play a few years in the minor league and 6 years later end up on the national team. I also believe the newer clubs , NYFC, Orlando and Becks in Miami will want to buy a lot of top rate foreign talent and even though it may hurt some American player on one end, their presence might also improve and raise their quality of play on the other as well as a across the league as a whole. There are many American players who in my opinion can improve with a dynamic player like a Ibra or a Kaka who will help them raise their game. Can't see how it won't as I've seen many just average players across the world raise their levels by playing alongside some of the world best.
see my thought is that any american players over 25 need to be at the level you want MLS at or they shouldn't be in MLS. right now due to cap and roster restraints some are. but in the "next level" MLS 6-8 spots per team for domestics (even if some are green card holders) leaves plenty of USMNT/CNT pool level players spots to play in MLS ... but it also gives them a better league with better teammates and better competition to play in. if a player over 25 isn't already at the USMNT/CNT pool talent level what benefit or responsibility does MLS to give him a job/place to play? in my mind none. that is what NASL/USL is for ... if that 25 year old guy has a late blossoming and becomes Wondo, well then he will be good enough for a raise and a place amongst those 6-8 spots per team. now players under 24 should have more reserved spots and a very healthy structure to get PT (USLPro reserve teams, etc).
Because you need to develop USMNT and CNT players somewhere and, right now, MLS is the only truly healthy league in both countries. Whatever you want to say about the quality of MLS's development skills, the lower divisions, by and large, are even worse. Not to mention, because of how poor American/Canadian youth development is, Americans and Canadians develop into decent players later in life than their counter parts in other countries.
see i guess we just disagree, i see MLS (the ideal 2022 high LigaMX quality MLS mind) as a place where players over 25 who are ALREADY at a NT pool level (ie on or near that pool) can ply their trade, play with and against high quality players and get good high level experience only eclipsed by a handful of other top leagues around the world. and of course to develop players under 25 to hopefully get to that level. if you aren't at that level by 25 it isn't MLS's job to give you a charity job in hopes you might eventually get there (a very rare late blooming occurrence). that is why there is a D2/D3 ... there are enough strong teams in today's NASL and USL where a 26+ year old can ply his trade and improve his skills and maybe get to the level i am talking about for these "fewer" domestics in a higher quality MLS. between NASL/USLPro there are at least as many stable teams now as there are MLS teams so there really is plenty of spaces for the Patrick Iannis of the world to play, they don't need to be playing in MLS and them not doing so has zero effect on the USMNT or CNT.
It's an artificial limit though. If you believe (as many do) that MLS needs to develop American players as part of it's core mission, than, yes, MLS is stuck until it develops better American players. Personally, I'd have no problem with MLS bringing in more players from Central or South America if they are of higher quality and good value for the money.
Yeah, that is interesting that Garber says the whole thing was basically his idea. He admits the whole thing isn't working, but he was vague as to why; apparently he doesn't think it was because the Chivas name alienated too many potential fans. Of course, he has to be careful what he says since Vergara is one of the owners and therefore one of his bosses.