2010-2011 CONCACAF Champions League [R]

that is not what i am speaking about. i even said that the future has yet to be written, but i will not give respect to a league which has done absolutely nothing to earn it. in that sense, it is understandable that the media and fans both 'underestimate' the league because the league has given every reason in eleven years, apart from one run by salt lake, to do so. what i am speaking of is not about one game, a tie, which to some people seemingly rewrites eleven years of failure, i know history won't win the game for monterrey next week, what i speak of is fans giving credit where it is not due. sure, it is taken overboard here in bigsoccer mexico, myself included, but such exaggerations are expected of on the internet, but the truth is no where has the league in its history earned the right to be respected as the mexican league has earned.

i don't buy into this entire analogy as mexico is striving to reach other regions at the moment, they're not the best in the world as US were at that time in basketball. a libertadores title still has yet to come to mexico, along with only one decent performance in the club world cup (atlante, in the modern era at least). mexico has its own goals to strive for and a change in infrastructure will likely be the only way to achieve that, not the growth of the united states domestic league.

 

Repped. Very well put. It seems Jagou misunderstood you entirely.

It's idiotic to say that usa club football improvement is good for us. We already have our challenges in the CWC and Liberators. Those tourneys, and our own domestic league, are enough to make us better. No need to add an extra obstacle. Regional dominance has been good for our league, it's gotten others to notice. It must continue, it's good for the bottom line. True champions will motivate themselves rather than wait for challenging opposition.

The basketball analogy was foolish. As much as Argentina was entertaining in 2004, usa basketball was still better. The Diesel and the Big Ticket weren't bothered to go to Greece. If they did, I doubt Ginnobli and Co. woulda won. Kobe and LeBron aren't better players because the rest of the world "caught up". The rest of the world's improvement has nothing to do with usa basketball's level. It just caused the best players to go to Bejing, but didn't make them better players.

Again, usa improvement will do much more harm than any perceived good. They're already trying to siphon off our viewers and fans. We shouldn't let that happen. Every dollar counts. The Mexican League has a ton of potential, and regional dominance will only help us realize it. It's a must.

 

Better pochos to poach if the nads improved to such a degree.

So, I take it you are in the better "competition doesn't improve you" camp. Why have any players abroad then?

 

I'd rather try to improve by beating competition that is already better than me then wait for others to catch up and then beat them (CONCACAF CL vs Copa Libertadores). So in that sense, it may do more harm than good?

 

Well, I guess I am a little confused.

Ever since I joined this little community, I have read countless threads about how shitty Mexico's situation is in CONCACAF because they have very little competition.

In the case of MLS, it is not a matter of if, but when, as far as reaching an extremely competitive level. But now I read from several folks that it is the worst thing that can happen to Mexico. So which is it? Do we want better competition or not? Or do we want better competition as long as it doesn't come from (shudder) MLS?


I am all for regional dominance, and I am also in the camp that believes playing better competition makes you better. I doesn't have to be better than you, it just has to be better all-around competition. So wouldn't it make sense, then, that in order to maintain this regional dominance, Mexican teams will have to do so against teams that are continually improving? Ergo, Mexican teams will have to improve as well, lest other leagues pass them by.

What would be devastating is inaction on the part of Mexican teams. And I think we all know that there is a much greater possibility of that happening than there is of making a concerted effort to make themselves better.

 

I agree, unless the FMF joins CONMEBOL, which will never happen, the MLS improving is a good thing for the Mexican league in the long run. The league in general is still pretty bad, but it does have a nice future ahead of it. I guess what pisses people off are the delusional, and sometimes plain idiotic comments by some of their fans. That and the obvious help and favoritism by CONCACAF suits. It will be a good thing if our teams stop participating in Libertadores.

 

There is truth to the argument that some people are making here that MLS is catching up enough to be consistently competitive with FMF. Real Salt Lake is proving truth to that.

Part of it has to do with the fact that the league is improving and has the room to improve. Another part of it is that Real Salt Lake is unprecedented in the fact that it would field its 1st team for CCL matches, sauf the last game vs. Cruz Azul.

No team has taken the competition this seriously ever. Now they are watching and they are likely going to get greedy.

But there is also a good argument being placed by some people here. Real Salt Lake is a fluke team.

Real Salt Lake's dominance in such parity based league is insane. Real Salt Lake is the middle of a 18 game regular season unbeaten streak (10 wins, +19 GD). Real is doing this with the same cash limitations that other teams have, and the team won't be able to keep the same depth and perhaps even their same coaches for too long considering how well they are doing. It is unlikely we will be able to see a team like Real Salt Lake ever again considering the crazy parity.

They won their group, even when Cruz Azul was there. They didn't have the most difficult path to the final, but they did their job to beat whoever they had in front. Monterrey is gassing out.

This could very well be a dream run.

Or Real's model which is proving to be successful and could be soon replicated by the entire league as stated before, and then the FMF will have some honor to defend in its club continental supremacy.

 

It's funny how you bold up the two things that TFC has never been.

 

Are you being sarcastic? If not, please explain.
--------------
Mike Tyson dominated boxing from 1986-1990. He didn't take Buster Douglas seriously, then got his ass whipped. Did it improve him? No, it kinda ruined his life. Sure he regained the title, but only to lose it to Evander right away, in another ass-kicking. The point is, having previously minnow competition strengthen itself is not a good thing.

There are countless ways to improve Mexican football, none of which are the challenge from a previously minnow league. We've been chasing Brasil and Argentina forever now, that's more than enough motivation to keep trying to improve.

 

In all fairness, the Mercosur (Chile, Uruguay, Argentina, Brazil) members have historically been a lot more developed in terms of infrastructure. The demographics of Mercosur was typically 65-75% European ancestry, which tend to be more affluent.

When compared to the Mercosur markets, Peru, Bolivia, Ecuador, Venezuela, & Colombia's infrastructure was not as adequate. Colombia's football did have a period of relative success in the 50s. They were able to attract players like Di Stefano... but then it went down.

It is no surprise that Chile, Uruguay, Brazil and Argentina have all hosted a World Cup.

Football had also become professional in Argentina, Brazil, Uruguay long before it become professional in the Merconorte markets. Bolivia, Peru, and Ecuador had very local and centralized leagues. Many of their leagues became professional in the late 50s and early 60s. Bolivia's league became professional in the 70s.

In order to have an climate conducive for progress, internal and external competitive forces are needed. And these competitive forces must be fair for all parties.

Mexico can not improve on its own anymore. It could strive to have a league that resembles the NFL (in terms of popularity, infrastructure, entertainment value, etc), but to compete internationally and do so, it needs stronger competition.

The US beating Mexico in 2002 woke up a lot of people. Assume Mexico had won that match and assume the USMNT had not caught up with us in Gold Cup silverware

Would we take the Gold Cup serious?
Would we have fixed up the FMF's old national team training center (CECAP) and updated it so it could serve refs, youth teams, and women?
Would we have forced the 20-11 rule?
Would we have forced first division teams to fund the reserve leagues?

It forced us to reexamine our football and youth development.

You need those competitive forces...

 

No. They are what they are because of each other. They are each other's foil. Mexico historically has not ever had that in Concacaf. They do now at the national team level and will have it sooner than later at the club level.

 

Mexico doesn't need to become an economic superpower to compete in football terms.

Countries like the Netherlands, Uruguay, have proven with adequate infrastructure, a proper scouting mechanism, & good coaching, a team can consistently be competitive and produce world class players.

 

Hating on your neighbor? Sounds familiar...

 

That came out wrong. What I meant to say is that if we eventually get kicked out of Copa Libertadores, which I get the feeling we eventually will, the MLS being competitive will be a good thing for us. Obviously Libertadores is 100x better than the CCL, but what will happen if they boot us out, or if we simply decide to stop participating? Let's not forget we have a bunch of agachones in charge of our federation.

 

If we get kicked out, then we gotta try to get back in ASAP. That tourney is vital to Mexican football. I can't imagine what it must've been like before we joined it. I wouldn't have been able to maintain interest in the sport if I was a fan back then. There is no substitute for it. We have to be a permanent part of it.

The competitive forces were already there then, and they're already there now. If we won in 2002, we still woulda been hungry for improvement after it. All those positive steps still would have occurred. Do you need someone to put a gun to your head to make you go to work every day? No, you go because you want to succeed on your own volition. The 2002 debacle didn't do us any good no matter how you spin it. And losing regional dominance at the club level has no positives. It will cause us to lose fans, which could lead to some serious disaster.

 

Or will it just force Televisa and the other big corporate owners to fork over more money to sign better South American players for the LMF in order to stay competitive once every MLS team has a couple Thierry Henrys?

There are seriously deep pockets in the LMF--asking sugar daddy to write a slightly bigger check so the big bad gringos don't dominate the CCL won't inconvenience anyone and will make all LMF competitions (including Libertadores) a bigger spectacle.

This isn't a national team debate, these are players that can be scouted, courted and bought, and the LMF has plenty of money to do it. They could buy half the Argentine league, if they wanted to.

If RSL advances tomorrow night, then Mexican fans should be able to demand more out of their owners, no?

 

Good luck Monterrey.

 

lol that is pretty bad