I actually love the quirkiness and also seeing them play in an iconic venue in the heart of the Big Apple, when they move to a sterile "made for MLS" venue, it won't be as cool.
Agreed. I'm okay with DC United because it fits nicely with playing in the capital. I was okay with FC Dallas because one team doing it had something of a mystique. Now it's kind of boring, and almost to the point where you assume a new team will have FC or United.
I think I'm still watching almost as many MLS games as I did ten years ago, but it's a much smaller percentage of the games. It's certainly a different experience than the early days. The soccer is better. The technical quality all across US soccer has gone up dramatically, to the point where the average USL starting fullback these days has better ball skills than many of the attacking players who were regular MLS starters in 1996. Especially in 2017 and 2018, there's an element of tactical diversity that was missing from MLS for a long time; until the last couple years, almost everyone has played whatever formation was "trendiest" at the time. But I think what I miss about 90s and early 2000s was being able to know the whole league reasonably well. For one, back then you could sit down and watch every MLS game in a week, and still have plenty of time to do other things over the weekend. By the late 2000s, you could still watch every game, but it would kill your weekend. Now it's simply impossible unless you do nothing but watch soccer. Also, because the league was smaller, it was possible to know every team's roster in some depth and recognize the faces of most of the starters in the league. As the league grows, I find myself recognizing faces much less often and looking for shirt numbers much more.
2007 median salary $50K (worth $61k today). 2013 median salary $95K (worth $104k today). 2017 median salary $135k That's +270% since 2007 and +142% since 2012 (actual). in 2007 180 players earned less than $50K, some as low as $12,500. The minimum salary is $67K for senior roster players and $53K for reserve players. $53K isn't a bad salary for an 18 year-old. Sources: https://www.americansocceranalysis.com/home/2015/1/26/visualizingmlssalaries https://www.mlssoccer.com/post/2015...-has-ratified-collective-bargaining-agreement http://www.espn.com/soccer/major-le...laries-causes-ripple-effect-throughout-league https://www.saving.org/inflation/inflation.php?amount=50,000
It sure isn't. But that isn't the point. The point is that, if a given player could elicit greater offers in a setting of competitive bidding, then $53,000 represents a ripoff. Indeed, the very reason for the single entity structure is not to do a solid for an 18-year-old kid; it is to pay American players far below what would be their value, leveraging these players' desire to play pro sports and their lack of eagerness to face the hardships of a move to a foreign country. Quite simply, this should not be legal. Fraser, the Federal court decision that sanctioned this arrangement, stands alongside the Supreme Court's Citizens United decision as one of the most poorly-reasoned decisions in history. This is a black mark on MLS; though clearly it is not a deal-breaker for me, because I am a fan of the league notwithstanding. When someone says that MLS sucks, or that MLS is a retirement league, or that there is no football talent in the U.S., then that person will get an argument from me. But if someone calls out MLS on its lack of competitive bidding for players, I will agree wholeheartedly. There is no way that I can defend this practice, either morally or by the standard of its material effect on mainly American players. (While the single-entity structure technically effects foreign players as well, at least the teams can informally work out behind the scenes which one is going to make an offer to a given foreign player, so that we have a simulacrum of competitive bidding, even if it is all done in secret.)
I didn't say I did it regularly. Just saying it was possible to do it and still have free time left in the weekend. Or, to put it a different way, in the 10-team days you could easily figure out a way to see every single team in the league at least once a month without watching more than two games per weekend. I typically tried to see the Galaxy's game and 1-2 others each weekend. I rarely went longer than six weeks without seeing any given team. Or, a third way to put it: you could watch the entire week's highlight reels in 20-25 minutes. Now it takes close to an hour.
DC United could get away with the name because "United" isn't just generic for DC--it's the capital of the "United" States. And DC is the city where the team actually plays while also riffing on the sound of the FCs and the ACs in the world. And, black. DC United was founded not long after referees moved to color jerseys which freed up black as a primary team color. All the other FC Untieds and black uniforms in MLS do feel generic, but DC United deserves credit for pulling it together early and in a legit way.
I was definitely one who watched every single televised game - so with the advent of Direct Kick (or its predecessor MLS Shootout), from four to ten games in a regular weekend. At least through the past couple of years, that is. I no longer feel compelled to watch all of the games and, interestingly, I find myself more likely to watch games of teams followed by folks in the PBP thread in N&A with whom I have shared the commentary for 10+ years than other games.
I still watch as many games as I can (which, unfortunately, isn't as many as I'd like); but for me, the reason has changed. Now, there are several teams I actually enjoy watching - or venues from where I enjoy watching them play. However, in the beginning, it seemed like more of a mission. I watched because I felt almost a duty to support the latest attempt at professional soccer. And, while the games weren't always top level, there was an excitement in the anticipation of what might be. Sure, watching games from the Meadowlands or Arrowhead Stadium where you could almost count the fans in attendance was discouraging, but you just had to believe - and It wasn't hard to imagine that if this league failed, we might never have D1 soccer in this country. So yea, the league has lost some of that....I guess, charm from when it was young and still crawling; but for it to still be here today, it had to move on.
I, like others, watched virtually every match from the early days of the league and, even though the stats say otherwise, the matches seemed a LOT more exciting in the early days. I just finished watching the replay of several matches from Saturday, Sunday and Wednesday and I found them quite unexciting. I am constantly amazed at how many truly bad plays and missed shots are not only praised but replayed over and over by the second rate announcers we are subjected to. (Note: I am retired, old, and simi-housebound so I have plenty of time to watch as much as I want) I wish I could develop any attachment to foreign teams and leagues but to enjoy a match at all I need some personal recognition and emotional attachment and it has been much too long since my overseas jaunts to have any such attachment to any overseas league or team. Even if the matches are better they are not as much fun to watch. I just wish we could get honesty in the coverage and also on the field. I am tired of the continuous faking and cheating that goes on. We hold 10 year old players to higher standards than we do the so called adults that scream and roll on the ground faking injury while others surround the referee and scream at him. On throw ins players are often cheating 10-15 yards up the field and on a free kick players are allowed to stand in front of the ball preventing the kick without hardly ever being carded. The enjoyment of watching MLS drops each year maybe in part because the matches have so much blatant illegal plays like the above and holding and other fouls in the box that go unpunished. Before anyone says that if those fouls were punished we would end matches with 8v7 situations I would counter by saying that players that are any good would rapidly learn how not to foul or do other stupid things or their teams would not play them. Also soccer at 8v8 or 7v7 could actually be VERY interesting as long as it was just "sometimes." Also the statement I have heard from refs that say "I don't want to impact the match by making those calls" just shows laziness and irresponsibility because they impact the match just as much, maybe more, by not making them. My complaints about the MLS are not unique to the MLS, in fact they are worse in a few other leagues, but the MLS is our top domestic league and the one I most want to watch and enjoy. The MLS could fix many, maybe most, of the problems if they choose but it is clear they choose not to because they do not have the guts to actually take the chance.
Actually what got me hooked on MLS (as opposed to being a once in a while casual) was Djorkaeff at Metrostars doing cool stuff even though the stadium was nearly empty. That and Donovan coming to Galaxy from Germany. I couldn't have cared less that he failed at a higher level, I was just happy to see him back. It amuses me to think how "innocent" a soccer fan I was back then. I had no idea the U.S. fan landscape could be such a divided battleground, or that British fans become irate over American terminology being used on American broadcasts. So yeah, I really do miss those older days even though the league was on shaky ground.
The first MLS player I really enjoyed watching was Jorge Campos he was flamboyant and highly skilled but the real reason I enjoyed watching him was that he stretched the boundaries of his position(s). Another player that captured my imagination was Carlos Valderrama. I thought it was amazing how he could beat most of the midfield of the opposition at a dead walk and then whip in a cross that was so perfect that his teammates fell all over themselves with disbelief. Players that can enthrall the fans are now much rarer and many of them spend their time either rolling around on the ground pretending to be near death with pain or berating their teammates and the referees for perceived mistakes. For me the MLS now rarely rises to the excitement level of a good snail race Any soccer is better than no soccer and, I guess, the MLS does, mostly, meet the standard for "any soccer.".
I went to an NPSL game last night, in other words, lesser than USL, Baltimore FC vs. DC United 2, Actually I really enjoyed it and thought the players where pretty fast and skilled, mostly D1 college players and low level pros. my standards are low I guess, I watch a lot of girls high school, so these guys where better quality than I usually see in person. So as you can see, I obviously can stand the quality of MLS.
I didn't know any MLS clubs had a 2 club in the NPSL. I thought the 2 clubs were only in the USL and PDL.
Definitely DC United, They wore the exact same uniforms. Billed as DC United U23 on the schedule. I do know that DC United has a farm club in Richmond though, so the team I saw was probably their 3rd level,
The only MLS "2" teams are in the USL. Some MLS teams also have developmental teams in the PDL. They mostly use the "U23" designation. Some MLS teams used to have U23 teams in NSPL but they moved to PDL a couple of years ago including DC United U23. I do not see DC United U23 listed on the NSPL website. Or on the PDL website. Very strange. According to the schedule, FC Baltimore doesn't start league play until May 19. I'm wondering if DC United U23 is playing a friendly schedule this year.
Whatever? You're overthinking this, it was a game, FCB vs. DC United U23, I WAS THERE, whatever league they are in, I don't care, it was just a night out.
The thing MLS can improve on is on having all its game available to the general public. Not all games are available unless you buy some type of "package" on top of the cable bill you already have. ESPN, Univision, Fox and FS1 show several games but not all. I have seen channels who would rather televise HS sports over MLS or repeats of European leagues games. I have no problem watching all Liga MX games if I want to or have the time because Univision shows them all. That is what I call easily available. And for the MLS to attract more viewers it has to make ALL the games easily available and not by buying ESPN+ or whatever other options they offer that promises to show all games for a price. I see whatever I can find but there have been some games I miss because no channel is televising it.
Outside of apparently Liga MX there’s no pro league in this country that makes every game available without an additional package. That’s an unreasonable expectation to set on MLS.
As someone that has watched MLS since '96, I would say that now I can watch a number of games or highlights from the whole league and do so without fearing the league will collapse tomorrow. There were times when I bought season tickets that I felt I was making a donation so the league would survive. Of course, in DC, we were spoiled by the early successes of DC United, so that helped with the interest. But, the league was definitely pinning the hopes of its success on fans also identifying with U.S. national team players. This is still somewhat true, but not nearly as much. Also, early on, there was not nearly as much soccer on cable or news accessible on the internet. I remember having to scour the Washington Post or USA Today for MLS items. Plus, I'd wait for the latest edition of Soccer America. Now, a lot of this is available with a few keystrokes. But, the quantity of content may have caused user fatigue. Finally, the older generation of clubs may not be reaching out to the markets as much as the newer clubs. There is an article about Atlanta United where Darren Eales was trolling the soccer bars to make a connection. I remember when DC United players like Eddie Pope and Ben Olsen were out in the community serving ice cream at the Ben & Jerry's in Georgetown. I think this level of effort has dropped off. P.S. Also, as I've matured, I've realized that my life will go on whether or not a certain professional or college team wins its annual championship. Sure, in DC, it would nice if the Capitals go to the Stanley Cup finals and win it. But, at the end of the day, how does that improve my life?
I agree with previous posters who say the league was easier to follow in the early days. It may be harder now to keep track of who's on a roster, especially with off-season moves, but the MLS website is much, much better now than it used to be too. The internet, like the league, was in its infancy and if anything, shows how much things have changed in the course of 22 years. I do like watching games where there fans are enthusiastic about their teams, as opposed to seeing small crowds in large stadiums like in the 'old days'. My gripe about the television schedule is that it's heavily laced with home games for Seattle-Portland-Orlando-Atlanta-Red Bulls-Galaxy-LAFC. It's virtually impossible for USA audiences to see a televised game from Canada. It's probably a rights issue, but I'd like to see a couple of games on ESPN or Fox from Saputo Stadium each year, especially if it's a game against Toronto. For that matter, there seems to be very few games broadcast from Chicago, New England, or Salt Lake City anymore. I'm not a gambler, but I wonder if the Supreme Court decision to allow legalized gambling in all states is going to increase the popularity of MLS, or if the league changes significantly because of sports betting. I probably won't be around to see it, but If the league expands to say, 36 or 40 teams, I predict there will be a relegation and promotion system in place and favorable financial considerations will be given to owners of the relegated teams.