how good is the USL??

[perucho79]

I just wanna know your opinion on the League....me personally I dont like it at all! I never watched a full game, the level is worst the a 3rd division in Peru!

[X-Caper]

I've been to quite a few Lynx games, and although I must admit, I'm no soccer guru, being only to 2 professional games in my life, I think it's still entertaining soccer. . . ..when good teams like the impact or whitecaps come in to play, it looks pretty good. But when you have the Lynx and another bottom cellar team playing, it's . . .well . . . interesting.

I like it and will continue to go in the future if the price remains right. What it boils down to for entertainment purposes, is you get what you pay for.

[Daniel from Montréal]

I just wanna know your opinion on the League....me personally I dont like it at all! I never watched a full game, the level is worst the a 3rd division in Peru!

It's things like this which make your argument fall flat.

Come see a game, then we'll talk.

I think the USL's level of play gets dragged down by the poorer players and teams.

The best teams could probably play in MLS and make the playoffs from time to time while the worst are just jokes (Somé for Toronto...).

And the USL has done rather well in international exhibitions.

The worst thing you can do is compare it to ________'s league. It's the only live professional soccer you can see and your city is lucky to have a good team, good crowds, lots of local players and a new stadium on the way. Get out there!

[USvsIRELAND]

IMO the USL in general is not very good, but there are players in USL who would do fine in MLS and in other leagues of a similar quality(English Championship, Norway, Denmark, Belgium).

[NORML]

From players I've spoken with who have played in Europe and the USL, they have said the level of play in the USL is better than some of the 1st divisions in Scandinavia. IMO, Montreal last year was the 9th-10th best club in Canada, USA, and Puerto Rico. In 2004 7th-8th. As Danial said there are some truly pathetic clubs out there but there are also some great ones too. Which is fine by me, I'd rather have some imbalance so I can see some great teams.

[Crazy_Yank]

I think the USL division 1 is of a decent standard. The level of play varries from team to team. The best (Rochester, Montreal, Seattle, Minnesota, etc...) could compete with MLS teams in a one off match, but I think they'd struggle over the length of a season. The bad teams are no more than semi-pro and most of the players have to find other sources of income during the off season. The standard is probably on par with England's league 2 (4th division).

[giggshasscored]

From players I've spoken with who have played in Europe and the USL, they have said the level of play in the USL is better than some of the 1st divisions in Scandinavia.

Honestly, I doubt its better than the Sweden, Norway, or Finland's top league. But you are correct in that there is some very mixed talent in the USL. A big gap between to top teams and the worst teams.

The MLS is not that great in my mind, but its definitely much stronger in season 10 than it was in season 3. The truth about the USL is that is seems to be run well (keeping in mind the challenges of having a league in the US or Canada is). I watched a few games last season and struggled to enjoy them, but I did see young players with some sort of future in soccer. Some teams in the USL now have soccer specific stadiums and more teams have plans for one in the works. This woudln't be happening if the USL had no future and if the USL wasn't going to get better over time

I think a big question is what will become the best way to make into the MLS. Playing in the USL when a player is in the 17-22 age range or playing NCAA soccer? Also, some players have had the opporunity to be on the reserve squad on a MLS team and getting few minutes versus being a starter in the USL. These are two places the USL needs to ultimately win out in order to be a decent league some day.

Plus the Canadian mix... MLS would consider a Candian team (Toronto may be getting one..can someone tell us what they know here?) so that could weaken the USL if one or two of those teams leave. At the same time, perhaps more Canadian teams could be in the USL, making it Canada's top flight and the US's D1 at the same time.

[giggshasscored]

The best (Rochester, Montreal, Seattle, Minnesota, etc...) could compete with MLS teams in a one off match, but I think they'd struggle over the length of a season.

I think this is a true statement.

One thing to keep in mind is if one of them left the USL for MLS they would start out a MLS regular draft, probably an expansion draft too.. So let me ask this question to you guys, if one of the better teams left next year would their first season in the MLS be better, equal, or worse than what we saw from Real Salt Lake and Chivas USA?

[Crazy_Yank]

I think this is a true statement.

One thing to keep in mind is if one of them left the USL for MLS they would start out a MLS regular draft, probably an expansion draft too.. So let me ask this question to you guys, if one of the better teams left next year would their first season in the MLS be better, equal, or worse than what we saw from Real Salt Lake and Chivas USA?


Probably better because they wouldn't be a brand new team. Montreal would be an MLS caliber side with 4 or 5 player upgrades. I'd wager that the current Impact squad would kick the living crap out of last years Chivas squad. The core of the team would still be the same and they'd have team chemistry. I can't imagine another expansion team being worse than Chivas was last year. I was suprised at how poorly RSL played because they have a lot of quality in their squad. Guys who are proven at the MLS level. Chivas was basically a collection of Mexican 2nd division players from Chivas Lapiedad.

[Crazy_Yank]

I just wanna know your opinion on the League....me personally I dont like it at all! I never watched a full game, the level is worst the a 3rd division in Peru!



Having seen the Peruavian 1st division many times on Goltv my take is that outside the top 3 clubs the level of play really isn't that great. I think the Impact would compare favorablly to mid-table teams. Montreal is my favorite USL team to watch. I think they play a very attractive style of soccer.

[BringBackTheBlizzard]

Honestly, I doubt its better than the Sweden, Norway, or Finland's top league. .

What's your basis for that opinion? In Finland's case, for example, soccer is way behind ice hockey and track and field in popularity terms in a nation of just 5 million people so the top national division in soccer is only semi-pro. Not all of European soccer is like the Premiership and serie A.

[pugetsoundmls]

Originally posted by giggshasscored
Honestly, I doubt its better than the Sweden, Norway, or Finland's top league.

I will admit that while sitting in the stands watching top Finnish clubs compete over the years, I've thought, "The Sounders can take these guys easily." Whether the lower USL-1 clubs could, who knows? And having watched some Swedish and Norwegian competition as well, I'd still like the Sounders chances. When players in MLS or the USL go to the Nordic region, they're not doing it for better competition (with a few exceptions in Denmark & Norway), but for the experience and a better salary.

Of course, this is all subjective. ;)

[perucho79]

Having seen the Peruavian 1st division many times on Goltv my take is that outside the top 3 clubs the level of play really isn't that great. I think the Impact would compare favorablly to mid-table teams. Montreal is my favorite USL team to watch. I think they play a very attractive style of soccer.


Maybe Montreal and Rochester could compaire to the teans in the peruvian league but the rest? I doubt it

[manic]

You can't get a fair opinion from just a casual look at a single game. Yesterday I watched Bordeaux-Lens on TV5 and almost fell asleep.

A better example: USA-China in women's WC just looked silly to me, but later I watched the Canada-Brasil semifinal of the women's U20 cup in Edmonton and that was a thrilling game even if the level of play is somewhat lower.

It would seem that you confuse spectacle with playing level and are not as much a soccer fan than a fan of big league entertainement.

We've live through it Montreal with Gridiron football. All you'd hear was how the NFL was so much better and so on. Where did that lead us? A bankrupt team and no football for 12 years. Now people know better and can relax and enjoy a good game without second guessing all the time. The Al's are one of the top team in the CFL and Laval and UdeM draw sellout crowds.

[manic]

Here's and interesting story:

In 1983 the Montreal Manic (NASL) made a tragic miscalculation and quickly lost two thirds of it's fan base, some of which transfered their allegeance to the upstart Inter Montreal team of the ill-conceived CSL1. That club was dismissed as being a 3rd division club and not worthy of comparaison. They featured mostly local players, many with pro experience(MISL) and a few foreign players. Team budget was relatively modest so you can compare today's Impact team.

The Manic in an atempt to win back their fans signed french star Jean-Francois Larios. Later that summer, he was sidelined with an injury and went to see the Inter play Olympique Marseille(then D2) in a tournament and was asked by journalists what he thought: "That's not a 3rd division team, they're going to win that tournament". The Inter beat OM and later Udinese(D1) to win the tournament.

Larios was soon released, le Manic folded at the end of the season (not before beating the Cosmos in the playoffs), and Inter ran out of money.

So what does 3rd division means? Le Manic won against FC Nantes and lost to Nottingham Forrest. NASL sides often defeated D1 teams but also lost (badly) to D2 teams in euro tours. USL clubs do well against MLS in US open cup and against teams like Sunderland(EPL). Except in England where 3rd and even 4th divisions are very competitive, most 3rd division teams are semi-pro and some first division leagues are barely above semi-pro except for 2 or 3 powerful teams. Consider also Cup tournaments where lower division teams often do very well.

[the shelts]

It's things like this which make your argument fall flat.

Come see a game, then we'll talk.

I think the USL's level of play gets dragged down by the poorer players and teams.

The best teams could probably play in MLS and make the playoffs from time to time while the worst are just jokes (Somé for Toronto...).

And the USL has done rather well in international exhibitions.

The worst thing you can do is compare it to ________'s league. It's the only live professional soccer you can see and your city is lucky to have a good team, good crowds, lots of local players and a new stadium on the way. Get out there!



I think Daniel sums it up well. The only thing I'd like to add is the USL is not trying to be as good as Peru's 3rd division. The USL is a start on for North American players and markets to see if soccer is a viable entity for the owners and the players.

I just don't think you can or should compare to other countries. It would be like comparing the Montreal Alouettes to an NFL level. I doubt you'd find anyone who would seriously think the Als' could win the Super Bowl but I also think they have had more exciting games in one season than some NFL teams have had in 15 years. Its all about what value it brings to the fan for the price of admission.

[manic]

Remember that most leagues around the world have a hundred year head start in developing markets and players.

There are 30 pro teams in the US, 3 in Canada. They represent the top level of the game we can afford and feature the best players we've got. Maybe in the future there will be more teams, more competition, and we'll develop better players. Zizou didn't pop out of nowhere.

Foreign leagues also don't compete with other established sports. Imagine if there were no NFL, MLB, NBA or NHL, and all the sports entertainement dollars went into soccer, then MLS would be the top league in the world(by far). The 1994 WC was hugely successful even if most americans didn't care.

People showed up to see Cruyff and Beckenbauer but no tangible legacy came out of it, and today crowds come out to see ManU in exhibition with little or no fallout.

The best way to develop soccer is at the grassroots level. Montreal, Rochester and Vancouver could generate MLS level revenues in just a few years from now, while MLS itself (and NASL for a while) did it by sinking millions of dollars. In either case, patience seems to be the key ingredient.

But if people snob the MLS or USL we will never get anywhere. Most soccer fans around the globe don't care how their local team compares to Chelsea or Juventus, they just support their team and enjoy the game.

[act smiley]

Foreign leagues also don't compete with other established sports.

Uh, yes they do. For example, in England there's rugby union, rugby league, cricket, even ice hockey and basketball...
I agree with the rest of your points though.

[toronto_sports_1 redded]

I just wanna know your opinion on the League....me personally I dont like it at all! I never watched a full game, the level is worst the a 3rd division in Peru!


To let you know Toronto has a team called the Lynx in the USL and to be quite honest they are a basic PUB League team, just guys off the street
trying to pass as a professional club...they are a joke just like the USL.

[X-Caper]

does anyone know if the USL is part of the north america champions league cup, or some other season cups in he US?