I meant what I said and I said what I meant. MLS will be a top league in the World by 2022 one-hund

Well, I don't think it's "chicken and egg", I think it's more like a "push me, pull you". MLS is going to have to take some risk and invest in salaries to drive revenue, not just based on the revenue it currently generates.

That's not new. I think MLS has done that since the beginning.

But there are limits. Even if they'll do it, it has to be very targeted spending. Right now, MLS doesn't just need good players, it needs players who can make them money.

The TV deals are up in 2014. That's an obvious opportunity. As a percentage of capacity, good seats are still available in many MLS stadiums. That's an ongoing opportunity. Player sales? That's more difficult than many believe, I think. Development of players is important, simply because it is still cheaper than buying a free agent roster, but I think MLS is years away from developing enough quality players to really make a lot of money off of it. That's a long term play IMO, and personally if MLS can eventually make enough in sales to offset the cost of development, better coaching and better scouting, I'd be thrilled.

So, if those are the opportunities, what does MLS really need?

I think Nelson Rodriguez was right on the mark:

"What are the characteristics of being the world’s greatest soccer leagues?’ One of the things that we landed on was players have a worldwide technical standard. We also had another one, which was an abundance of good [number] nines and 10s . . . I think we need still a lot of work on attacking players in this country. Clint Dempsey aside, with his phenomenal success in the Premier League, it’s still an area where you look at the recent qualifiers and no Dempsey, Bradley, Donovan and ... two goals in two games. Not easy. I think that that is a big area."

http://www.grantland.com/blog/the-t...player-behind-the-lines-with-nelson-rodriguez

MLS still has to import 9s and 10s.

And that's okay.

Look at the top goal scorers in leagues like the Eredivisie that are great at developing players and notice how few are Dutch:

http://www.worldfootball.net/torjaeger/ned-eredivisie-2012-2013/

Even though J-League teams are limited to three per team, look how many top J-League scorers are from Brazil:

http://www.worldfootball.net/torjaeger/jpn-j-league-2012/

Look how many top scorers in the Mexican League are imported!

http://www.worldfootball.net/torjaeger/mex-primera-division-2012-2013-apertura/

It's okay to buy the right offensive players if you can't produce enough of them -- and few can.

So, Rule Number 1: With limited money to spend, import the best 9s and 10s MLS can afford. I would never, ever waste DP money on a defensive player, even if he was a "name" or had some ethnicity MLS wanted to attract.

Offense sells for TV, so look at leagues and get better 9s and 10s. The best MLS can afford. Name players in big markets, younger guys in smaller ones.

Second, if you look at non-attacking players, I think MLS can develop some very good ones in a reasonable period of time. That's where it has an advantage, as it has keepers and defenders who are rugged enough for a physical league. I'd earmark those for sale.

And I'd study two clubs in particular that I think have a good "selling strategy", Sao Paulo FC and Lyon. Lyon has a price on everyone. If they get it, they don't agonize over it, they sell. And they have someone earmarked to replace that player. In short, they've done their homework.

Brazil has suffered IMO because financial problems forced many clubs into a spiral of selling players just to pay the bills. SPFC has grown financially stronger, however, because they the right view on sales, I think, which is essentially: sell the great ones, keep the good ones, and look to bring back any great Brazilian who fails to settle in Europe at a bargain price.

But, and here's the key, both clubs sell to get better, not just to make a profit.

Rule 2: Sell to get better, not just to pay the bills. Primarily earmark good young defensive players for sale, but with a strategy for how they can be quickly replaced (which means more allocation money needs to be available to teams from the sales to buy or pay the replacements). Since MLS struggles to develop quality attacking players, I wouldn't be anxious to part with them, rather I'd figure out a way to pay the best of those players more to keep them longer.

Again, I don't think MLS will be a top league by 2022, but that doesn't mean I'm not enthusiastic about the league's prospects.

 

I don't think there's any question that if you want to build a competitive team pretty quickly in MLS -- most leagues really -- you do it with defense. And if I'm the general manager of a specific team, I'd be tempted to do it to.

But I'm speaking now for what I think is best for the league.

Again, for younger readers here, people forget that the modern NFL salary cap isn't all that old. Ron Wolf's 1990s Packer teams were some of the first great teams built early in the cap era, and he literally broke out his cap by position. He valued quarterbacks, left tackles, defensive ends -- and he put more of his cap money there. Now, clearly he needed lots of talent everywhere to win, but he wouldn't pay over certain amounts for certain positions. He'd let them walk if need be. I think Ted Thompson uses a variation of Wolf's formula to this day. (Wolf's actually got a book on this for those interested).

Whether MLS increases the cap or not, its financial resources are very limited and will probably remain so for some time. So I'd concentrate them where the league has the best chance to get the most bang for the buck.

Given the choice, I still say if I could direct league policy, with the few DP slots available I'd recommend MLS buy 9s and 10s.

Another example:

While we compare them frequently, there are, I think, many differences between MLS and the J-League that don't always make them good comparables, but in this case the rules do require a similar discipline. Since each J League club is limited to only three non-AFC foreign players, those three slots are precious. They need to use them on positions they can't easily develop themselves from the domestic player pool. What players do they buy? From what I can see, the answer is overwhelmingly 9s and 10s, typically from Brazil.

Put the money where the audience won't miss it.

Again, I really think MLS can develop good keepers and center backs from the domestic player pool. I suspect holding mids too. I'm not saying they aren't important, indeed I'd specialize in developing them for re-sale in Europe. If MLS can't develop enough domestic players for the league, I think MLS can also get good defenders from places like Columbia for a lot less than DP wages.

So, while specific potential DP defenders might help a team, I wouldn't focus limited financial resources on them.

 

Let's put this dicussion in the context of a real potential "name" target, as Steve Davis argued much the same thing on NBCS' website arguing that RBNY or LA should go after Richard Dunne.

http://prosoccertalk.nbcsports.com/...ps-like-richard-dunne-as-keys-to-mls-success/

Now, as it happens, I like Richard Dunne as a player. I'm sure he could help an MLS team. If the cap was high enough where the choice didn't have to be made, bring him in. Unfortunately, given the payroll dollars and limited DP slots, choices do have to be made, and as anemic as some MLS attacks are -- just switching play at speed remains an adventure many places -- I'd never put those dollars towards a player like him. Not when very good defenders can be developed here or acquired for far less from leagues like Columbia.

Where I could see a compromise is on the use of a third DP slot. As I've said in other threads, in the next five years I think there would be a real benefit to have some mechanism to retain under 23 year olds who are completing their first MLS contract and have real talent but aren't quite ready to move (at least at a price MLS will accept). I'm talking about players who might make $325,000 - $500,000 who have already been on an MLS roster for a minimum period of time, again say at least three years. I wouldn't see a need to be as restrictive with those dollars regarding the position (and I also wouldn't apply a luxury tax BTW).

But given that I've argued for years that MLS should give the teams more leeway in roster composition, its a fair question as to why I'm arguing for more restrictions in this case. Honestly, its simply being pragmatic IMO. MLS wants to be a top league in nine years time. With the money it has, many of these top players are going to have to be Americans developed by MLS. I just don't see any way the league (or US Soccer generally) can develop that many quality American 9s and 10s that quickly -- I'm talking about players who could start for mid table teams in the top four leagues. At least in the near term, the only hope is to supplement development efforts by buying some IMO, and even that won't be cheap.

At least for the next ten years, I'd save the DP dollars for them, not the Richard Dunne's of the world.