Except that the regular playing of the kids came prior to the glut of injuries. Busio was featuring regularly, not to mention Salloi. Wan Kuzain and Lindsey were also getting minutes. It is a huge change from watching EPB dress and not play, even with injuries and suspensions on the back line.
If the cap or salary budget is provided to all teams by the league why would it widen the gulf? Some teams will be run by incompetents but they'll eventually get fired so I don't see it as a structural issue.
Follow the NHL model of a cap and a floor. If the cap goes to $13 million the floor would/should be around $9-10 million.
I could see it widening the gulf even if all teams spend the same. Teams who invest more into their infrastructure (scouting, academy, making the team a place players actually want to play with nice stadiums and training facilities) will have a massive advantage, and I believe at a higher budget, those advantages would be magnified as 500k-1.5m players are probably more predictable and less of a crapshoot than 100-300k players. That being said, let the crap teams suck! If you make it harder for terrible organizations to luck into a group of players, they cant keep being terrible organizations and still make a bunch of MLS Cup finals and lose. If the Revs didn't have that competitive run during the Nicol/Twellman, Dempsey, Joseph, Parkhurst, Ralston era they probably would have hit rock bottom years ago and may have responded by now.
That makes no sense as there is no salary cap. If the salary budget increases to $12 million they all get $12 million from Uncle Don to spend on salaries. Adding a fourth DP, or increasing GAM significantly would increase the gulf.
Surely fans of the USMNT want American players playing at a higher level. If that means average domestic players get less playing time how does that harm the USMNT?
My question: There's a group of MLS fans who say quality and teams with winning traditions are key to success. But those fans seem to be the ones who are in favor of expansion. Which will dilute the quality of the player pool and make championships rare for each team. And these fans are the ones who criticize the signing of international superstars. Who are usually among the highest quality players in the league.
How could you possibly have come to the conclusion that these three groups you talk about are the same people? Without evidence of that it sounds like you are just making that up in order to support some point.
Not to mention that your 'question' is provably false. The quality of players has increased with expansion. As for championships, we've seen new champions lately and the rule about Chicago, DC or the Gals winning something every year is long broken.
Apparently being benched in Europe is a great learning experience for the player but in MLS the same thing means there's something inherently wrong with the league.
1. If MLS starts paying its players more, that will make youth development more valuable. 2. Since the core payroll is paid by MLS and not the teams, i don’t understand how increasing the salary budget would decrease parity. In fact, i would argue the opposite; if non-DPs are paid more, they’ll be better players and decrease the gap between them and DPs.
So, here's the thing... First off, when I watch MLS, I want to see quality soccer, and I want my team to win. I imagine everyone here shares that sentiment. I would like to see the league grow, in terms of popularity, in terms of business metrics, in terms of quality of play, etc. At 10 or 12 teams, the league struggled to keep itself afloat. At 20 teams, the league was able to reach a bigger audience. I believe there will come a time when the value of the teams will make it difficult to find viable new cities for expansion. The cost of teams 31 and 32 may well approach $500 million expansion fee. Beyond that, who knows. Until this point expansion has been good for the league. As for the player pool, it has been shallow, and had geographic limitations. Baseball and football have no trouble developing players for 28 and 55 man rosters for their top leagues in the US with more teams. Soccer should be able to do that, too. The growth of the league has allowed teams to focus more on player development recently. International superstars... Whatever dude.
Except of all the teams that have played in the EPL, only 8 of them have currently fallen more than one division*. 5 of them played in League One this season and one of those 5 will be back in the Championship next year. 3 played in League Two. * On top of the 8 is also Wimbledon, however you want to account for what happened to them.
Today the promotion game from the Championship is being played. It comes in at £170 million for the winner. The teams playing are Aston Villa, one of the most storied teams in EPL history, that has been in the Championship for 3 years since relegation and qualified for the promotion playoffs twice in that time. Their opponent is Derby County, a team that has never been lower than the 3rd division, and never lower than the Championship since the EPL was founded. Simply getting from League One to the EPL is nearly impossible these days.
Villa a storied team in EPLhistory? You sure about that? Current premier League teams that have played in League One in the last 10 seasons. Leicester Sheff Utd Brighton Norwich Wolves Southampton
Founding member of the league. Current total domestic and European trophies for English Clubs: ManU 66 Liverpool 61 Arsenal 46 Chelsea 30 Tottenham 26 Aston Villa 25 I'd say the 6th most successful team in the history of the country, who only recently fell on "hard" times with a 3 year stint in the Championship, counts as storied.
Except you said storied team EPL history. I wasn't going to question it but you clearly know when it was founded based on a later comment. They have won a couple of league cups in that timeframe.
4 cup wins, 3 cup runner ups, and qualified for Europe 11 times while in the EPL. Consistently in the top half of the league until things started going south in 2010-11. 14k+ comments, 4k likes. You should have gone with not saying anything.
In defense of his post to like ratio, likes weren't around back when he started, so a good chunk of his posts were unlikable.
This should be the counter-argument to every person that questions the success of MLS. ATL UTD is easily worth more than $400mil he bought for $80 that's already a freaking $320 mil value flip. What established sport do you know is creating that kind of investment opportunity. In the coming years Blank will have made close to half a billion just off of being a savvy businessman.
I admit way back in the mid 00s when I first joined this site I was one of those fans and I got jaded with MLS after what I thought was a failure in not increasing the cap enough. I thought how can they want people to take this league serious when they aren't serious about its growth. Over time they've showed they know what they are doing. It's a evolution with some folks some will eventually come around to this conclusion as I did. I went from screaming the cap should be $10-15 mil in 2008 to now understanding how foolish I sounded. I'm sure many of the old times on here remember me doing that and putting up with it.
This isn't Instagram or reddit where people need to post "witty" comments just for the likes. Any kind of behavior doing so will ruin the quality of this board, and should be met with a warning.