Couple concerns about possible cross-purposes: 1) For the full teams, you've got teams of young prospects out for individual improvement and to catch the eye of the big club's coaching staff up against other teams that are out there as a team, and are out there to make sure they're earning a paycheck. I wouldn't reckon that the latter is going to show much sympathy or quarter to the former, either in terms of physicality or the scoreline. 2) For the 5-man reserves, you have that same kind of cross-purpose within the team. You've got a coach that's trying to keep his job on a week-to-week basis, having the team snag points any way they can, and then you have a handful of players that are more worried about learning the game, and they're also trying to play a style, so that the big club will look at them. Not that I'm suggesting these things make anything a bad idea, just stuff I'm watching out for, issues to try to manage.
One thing I would like to see along with this partnership for loaning players, is the MLS/USL collaboration on youth development in general. Financial support for USLpro academies, or helping clubs start MLS standard academies. For this the affiliated club or MLS (if they don't have an affiliate) get an option on players. If a European clubs comes in they'd have to buy the rights from the MLS to talk to the player and club. I think it would benefit both sides, more young players getting professional academy development increasing the talent pool. Not only that but in areas like North Carolina, South Carolina, Central California, etc. which have non-MLS affiliated academies but are some distance away from a pro-club. For the USL more young talent, combined with a more marketable league (after the partnership), could turn them into a bit of a feeder league. For MLS fans the idea of being a feeder league might be a touchy subject, on the other hand for the USL having more valuable youth players which you can sell for a profit could ensure sustainability. If a European club bought a USLpro player for $5m someday that would be a big deal.
I imagine there were a lot of obstacles. The lower divisions under MLS have been pretty chaotic the past few years(well more than they usually are).
The politics has been pretty chaotic, but discounting the fact that Portland, Montreal, and Vancouver are in MLS the lineup of D2/D3 teams has been relatively stable by historical standards.
This is a good point. MLS teams are already partnering with affiliate academies outside of their territory. It makes perfect sense to integrate that with the proposed MLS/USL affiliation. For instance, Real Salt Lake has an academy in Arizona. USL is expanding to Phoenix, under an hour away. If the Arizona USL club becomes RSL's affiliate, local kids would have an appealing path to the pros: train at the academy, sign a developmental contract and play for the local USL club, then when ready, play for RSL. Similarly, I don't know if San Jose has an affiliated academy in Sacramento, but I was able to find they did have a U-14 pre-academy school there. The fact that there's going to be a new USL program presents a good opportunity for affiliation. Although I wonder how MLS expansion would affect this. For instance, the Chicago Fire have an affiliate academy near Indianapolis, so that would be a good location to have a USL/reserve affiliated team. But instead a group there is getting an NASL team and wants to pursue MLS membership. Hypothetically speaking, if they get it I would assume Chicago would cede their territorial rights to the Indiana Fire academy (perhaps being compensated for the loss with part of Indianapolis's entrance fee.)
They're affiliated with Cal Odyssey in the Fresno area, so the Fuego would also make sense for a partnership.
This is good stuff. Although, I'm not sure about how any of this might affect the NASL. I'm hoping that this USL announcement, while still premature, is the first of many tie-ups with the lower divisions. The game can grow a lot faster when everyone works together.
I would love to see the Fuego make the jump up. I had a conversation with the general manager not long ago (but befor this news was announced) where i asked him about why they hadn't moved up to USL PRO, and his answer was pretty simple: they make money on the club the way it is, and if it aint broke, don't fix it. This kind of news about the integration could really shake things up though, because with San Jose possibly feeding them money, they may take the risk of moving up because.. well.. there would be no risk anymore. Not quite. This season at the very least, USL PRO teams will play a home and a away match against every MLS Reserve team ,unless they break into conferences, in which case you'll play against your conference/division teams. THAT is something I doubt the players union would allow lol
Well, in baseball, any player who makes less than the major league minimum but is called up to the big squad gets his salary boosted while he's there. I imagine that's probably what he's talking about--guys signing a minor-league contract, but getting paid MLS minimum if they're on the active roster of the big club.
The NBADL and AHL have similar provisions. Considering how well that seems to work overall, and the fact that the unions in those leagues aren't fighting it, I cannot imagine the much weaker MLSPA would piss and moan too much.
Has anyone asked MLS whether these "5" players are supposed to be MLS roster spots 26-30 or 31-35. It makes a huge difference.
The big difference that I am referring to is that it isn't just a league to keep players in game shape and get some academy kids a run against more mature competition but rather an actual independent league where the games actually mean something. And because of that difference there could be differences to how academy players are treated with respect to playing in this league compared to the past MLS reserve leagues. I think there should still be an MLS reserve league along with the new plans.
I would imagine that the academy serves more as the farm team, insomuch as that's where they are looking to develop talent over a multi-year period and familiarize them with the Barcelona system. The B team, on the other hand, is where you'd place players that may be too old for the academy but still need time to adjust to their new environment, as well keeping players match fit in case they need to be called on.
Are the Barcelona B players available for selection for Barcelona A? The "Reserves" are part of the first team. They are the padding at the end of the bench to 1) make sure practices can be full squad when needed, 2) provide cover for injuries, suspensions, poor form, international call-ups. Reserve Division play is built around the needs of the League. It provides some structured minutes for the end of the bench, or a look at the odd trialist, but the reason the schedule is 10 games (or so) and not 30 is because those players belong to the first team. You don't want a first team player unavailable for selection because they're worn out from reserve games. The farm team is a separate team. Players on the farm team are there to play. Warzycha's loan to Carolina was canceled last season because he wasn't getting minutes. Sporting would rather he be in Kansas City not getting minutes than in Cary not getting minutes.
Personally, I'd hope that spots 26-30 would be getting minutes somewhere else. No point in carrying them around as dead weight on the first team.
Who says they're "dead weight"? Just because they may not log measurable minutes in league games, it doesn't mean they don't serve a purpose. My guess is that it takes a squad size of close to 30 to keep a team going through a long league season while maintaining a workable training regimen.
Yeah, but some of those guys can be the same as the ones on your reserve roster. Week to week, you wouldn't need much more than the 22 it would take to be 2-deep at every position. (And of course, they only let you bring 18 to the game.) Assuming you're not one of the "whole USL affiliate" teams, seems to me you can have 30 guys and shuttle some of them back and forth when needed. And if you have 35 guys, there's a real question as to what that 35th guy is doing; he's not a prospect, he's not a 'cup of coffee' type who's very nearly as good as the last player on the 18-man game day roster, so what is he? Question to me is more about whether the USL team would accept a player when they don't know if he'll be there the following week. That's another of the bullet points about cross-purposes. It could be very fruitful for MLS interests to try to use USL Pro as reserve games, seems harder to harmonize that with USL's interests.
Yes, indeed they can play for Barcelona A. looknohands explained well how Barcelona B works. Personally I would defend that Barcelona B could be considered not only a reserve team but also a important tool used by Barcelona to develop their players.
I'm surprised that you think that players so far down the roster are adding much value. As you'll recall, there was a time when MLS squad sizes were closer to 20. For a comparison, I happened to take a look at Stevenage in League One, which is where Gary Smith now manages. In the midst of a long 46-game season, he's working with a squad of 22, including two players in on loan (one being Robbie Rogers). Smith is quite willing to loan out players he's not using, and there are currently five out on loan to lower divisions (one being Andy Iro). As much as some people may want to turn their noses up at Stevenage, I think that's a reasonable example that a reasonably frugal team doesn't need a big squad to get through the season. (And I'm saying 25 rather than Stevenage's 22.)