MLS, Europe, etc. (pulled from Camp Cupcake 2016)

Discussion in 'USA Men: News & Analysis' started by DHC1, Jan 10, 2016.

  1. bsky22

    bsky22 Member+

    Dec 8, 2003
    That is a lot of effort to not share an opinion. I didnt say there werent negatives and even acknowledged that I may have missed some.

    I am more than happy to consider negatives, but many that often see are just excuses.

    Who are the intellegent people against it and what do they have to gain by keeping things the way they are?

    I think I stated that the way you were handling the discussion reminded me of a child. Maybe that is on me. I grew up playing a bunch of sports. As kid, I dreamed of playing college in at least two sports. I saw first hand different levels of competition and pressure, so when someone says things like Freidel it is glaringly obvious. Maybe you are someone who didnt experience these things so you dont understand what he is saying. The trouble with this path is that you dont know and are taking a hard position instead of trying to learn from others who have been through this... like Friedel.

    I simply want to know what you think are the negatives. I will learn something and/or explain why I dont think they are that negative. The biggest negative i can think of off the top of my head is that winning can take a higher priority to development, but think if development is the focus, then the player should likely be in a lower division.
     
  2. Mahtzo1

    Mahtzo1 Member+

    Jan 15, 2007
    So Cal
    That quote right there says an awful lot!

    So, if any intelligent person is against it, it is because they have something to gain? You start with something like that and you expect me to believe you have an open mind?
     
    tomásbernal and Mario Balotelli repped this.
  3. bsky22

    bsky22 Member+

    Dec 8, 2003
    Why so sensitive? I didnt say there werent people who are against who dont benefit from the current system. I just asked who those specific people were.

    I will listen to anybody's thoughts on the issue, even MLS owners. I am obviously skeptical of people whose views are aligned with their pockets, but that doesnt mean I think they have to be wrong.
     
  4. jond

    jond Member+

    Sep 28, 2010
    On My Squatty Potty
    Club:
    Levski Sofia
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Hot take:

    MLS would be better if teams like SJ and NE were relegated. SJ in particular wastes a would-be good market.
     
    VBCity72 repped this.
  5. bsky22

    bsky22 Member+

    Dec 8, 2003
    At least San Jose signed a coach with ambitious goals. Almeyeda has suggested he needs a year to implement. I wouldn't watch them until next year.

    On the other hand, NE is on cruise control. Their fans are actually wishing they would be relegated.
     
  6. Patrick167

    Patrick167 Member+

    Dortmund
    United States
    May 4, 2017
    I find most of the opposition is always from people empathizing with the current MLS owners. Arguing from their point of view; or what people assume is their point of view. Nobody who is looking at it as a neutral would really be against Pro/Rel, why would they? Even Grant Wahl, one of the most pro-establishment guys out there, has the position of wanting it as a fan and just hoping a business deal can be worked to everyone's satisfaction to make it happen.

    I don't think it will change the motivations of the players in MLS much overnight. But just because something isn't a "silver bullet" for everything doesn't mean it wouldn't help. What it would do is open the 2nd and 3rd divisions up to investment and probably create a 4th professional tier. This would eventually help MLS as it would just create more interest in pro soccer generally.

    I think the problem Freidel is finding is due more to roster rules than lack of relegation. While some MLS players are on short term contracts, most are not. The ones on short term deals are probably not the better players and not the ones Friedel is talking about. The place MLS is in the global food chain also lends it to having a lot of players neither good enough to move up or having already made their last step back.

    The Ad Hominen attacks on Friedel instead of just accepting that he has an opinion is the same MLS insecurity that is shown in this entire thread. If MLS roster rules are important to maintain the solvency of the league, then just own them and enjoy your soccer. DPs taking their paycheck and not really trying is nothing particularly new or unique to New England. I can imagine TAM players and HG players and others on long term deals who probably don't have ambition to move up can also be problems. Then when enough are a problem, with the limited roster of an MLS team, what do you do?

    I can understand Friedel wanting to institute an EPL culture at a club. Just probably a MLS 1.0 club is not the place and it probably only works at an EPL or other Top 40 club.
     
    btlove repped this.
  7. bsky22

    bsky22 Member+

    Dec 8, 2003
    That has been what I have seen. There some very simple answers the financial issues for current managers.

    I agree with both point. I dont see a huge impact immediately, but the second part is big one for me. Bringing investment into the game outside of the less than 30 MLS owners would be huge for the game.

    No idea what problem Freidel is having. There have been plenty of quality coaches from outside MLS struggle in the league.

    The league and fans dont own anything. They market every possible thing they can and deny everything negative. It was a lot easier to be empathetic when they were struggling to survive.
     
    adam tash repped this.
  8. bsky22

    bsky22 Member+

    Dec 8, 2003
    Here are Pulisic, Mckennie, Sargent, and Adams thoughts on playing in Europe. Adams talks about how MLS has some good teams but dont have strong teams up and down the table at 3:20 (odd because it was MLS that is supposed to have the parity). Mckennie even talks about getting "beaten up" by the fans at 8:00. At 12:20, the other guys talk about the "trailblazer".

     
  9. There's no contradiction in it. Parity doesnot imply quality and uneven financial playfield doesnot mean the "poorer" teams havenot got quality above the mls standard.
     
  10. What precisely is ment with that epl culture?
     
  11. bsky22

    bsky22 Member+

    Dec 8, 2003
    There is no contradiction in the real world but definitely an issue with naive MLS fans.
     
    adam tash repped this.
  12. Patrick167

    Patrick167 Member+

    Dortmund
    United States
    May 4, 2017
    I think like he experienced. Every guy on the roster is ready to kill to take the job off the guy ahead of him. Every chance to get a point is appreciated and given maximum effort.

    Poor play was called out by fans and media quickly and harshly.

    Isn't there a story of Fulham signing a new guy and Dempsey meeting him at his car after practice and telling him he would kill him if he took his job?
     
  13. DHC1

    DHC1 Member+

    Jun 3, 2002
    NYC
    There's little doubt in my mind that the level of MLS has improved dramatically, particularly at the play level of the average and last starter level (the use of DPs has always led to a few high quality players well above the league).

    That being said, maybe we're not keeping up with the rest of the world who is also advancing? The CCL this year has been an utter embarrassment for MLS.

    I could also theorize that MLS is try to evolve to a style of play that is ill-suited to play against Mexican teams.....
     
  14. Mahtzo1

    Mahtzo1 Member+

    Jan 15, 2007
    So Cal
    I don't have a list. I don't plan to make a list. I made that statement based upon postings from BS. I have seen reasonable posters that consistently make very thoughtful and reasoned posts give opinions from both sides of the issue. I have to admit that my vetting process is hardly scientific or thorough. I didn't give any IQ tests and I never checked their financials, business dealings etc to determine if they meet any specific intelligence or conflict of interest criteria.

    Just asking the question makes it seem like you doubt there are many who meet your criteria and makes you seem a bit close minded. Just admitting that someone intelligent might reasonably come to a different conclusion than you doesn't mean you have to be wrong. The other possibility, of course is that something else is the true answer (and that something else doesn't even have to be the current choice)....it could be that one thing is better in certain cases and the other for different cases, perhaps neither is optimal and there is a third or a fourth example that would be better than both.
     
  15. Mahtzo1

    Mahtzo1 Member+

    Jan 15, 2007
    So Cal
    I think you are right about the overall level having improved dramatically. I think it is pretty hard to argue against it. I do think, however, that the teams have not improved uniformly. I think there is more of a gap now than there was initially.

    Over the past 10?years or so, there have been many different rules etc that have been implemented that teams can use to improve their teams but they fall into two broad categories: 1) Spending money on players 2) developing young players, via academies and USL partnership

    I think it is pretty obvious that teams have taken several different approaches. Some have spent more money, some have gone all in on development and some have done nothing or are just beginning to jump on the bandwagon. The teams that have improved the most have implemented one or both of the strategies ($ or development). there is some separation within that group based upon how hard they went in and how efficient their plan was. There were obvious growing pains that the teams ran into as they learned how best to build a team. (How do you spend $ on a DP? Who is the best choice? A star? a young up and comer? Do you need a USL team? How do you integrate young players into the first team? all are things that teams needed (still need) to work out.)

    The teams that are falling far behind are the teams that haven't done any of this. Perhaps those teams will start to work on at least one of the strategies...especially now that they see the potential for return on their money by selling a top player which they developed (either US player or young Latin American...or Canadian). San Jose seems to be putting more emphasis on their youth system...we'll see.

    As far as MLS being embarrassed by LigaMx, it think that is more to do with the Mexican teams. I think MLS kind of caught the Mexican teams off guard last year and they were determined not to let that happen again, combine that with some normal fluctuation in talent and quality of the teams from year to year. NYRB just sold Adams...he's pretty important to RBL too. Atlanta isn't the same team (no Tata and no Almiron), Houston...really? etc. Last year probably gave a little false optimism on where MLS really stood and this year probably underrates MLS a bit.
     
  16. DHC1

    DHC1 Member+

    Jun 3, 2002
    NYC
    Even if we average out the two years, it's still pretty bad for MLS. Our best need to be on par with LigaMX in short order as from the limited amount of LigaMX I've watched, they haven't improved.....
     
  17. Mahtzo1

    Mahtzo1 Member+

    Jan 15, 2007
    So Cal
    It may still be pretty bad for MLS but I think if you average out the two years it is an improvement over the past. Last year was a historically good year and this year was probably a historically bad year. In the past, MLS teams typically drew or won by a small margin at home and lost (often big) away. this year, MLS has really stunk up the competition. I don't really think either is a good representation but an averaging might be a bit more accurate. I don't really watch LigaMx too much so can't really comment on how they, as a league are improving or stagnating.
     
  18. bsky22

    bsky22 Member+

    Dec 8, 2003
    So, you have seen posters you think are reasonable have objected to promotion/relegation?

    I doubt it because most of the arguments I have seen have simplistic and come from the stand point of the current MLS owners. I dont engage in this debate as people are too emotional. I dont think there is any basis to statement that it makes me seem close minded. I just wanted opinions of people who didnt have personal reason to not want it. What is close minded about that? I want to hear unbiased ideas.

    You have stated that the negatives out weigh the positives. Why cant you just state the negatives?
     
  19. Mahtzo1

    Mahtzo1 Member+

    Jan 15, 2007
    So Cal
    #2169 Mahtzo1, Apr 5, 2019
    Last edited: Apr 5, 2019
    Actually I have. I haven't read any pro/rel posts for quite some time because it isn't really a topic I am too passionate about one way or the other I see some positives but at the same time I see a few negatives and more importantly, in my mind, I don't see any practical way of implementing it in the US...at least if MLS is to be a participant. (not a scenario I can envision no matter how much you and some others may desire it's demise). In the near future (next 10-20 years) I don't see MLS releasing it's grip on the top spot. I see USL increasing it's footprint but at the same time I see them as increasingly tied to MLS. However, I can see promotion/relegation being implemented in the lower leagues...whether that be USL or another league. I don't really have a particularly strong opinion on how it would work. I do think there might be different dynamics that go into effect with a league that is expanding and trying to continue expansion (pretty much every league in the US), and a stable (in terms of expansion) league (pretty much every league in the world). Again, I don't claim to be an expert on how those differences will pan out. I am pretty sure that at least some of the results that many people believe are obvious outcomes will be wrong.

    For what it is worth, I think the biggest single benefit for fans is the "Cinderella" team. It gives a small club the chance to rise from the bottom to the very top. Unfortunately, I don't think that occurs common enough that, by itself, would justify pro/rel. If you are a neutral fan, watching a relegation battle has more interest because it has more meaning. If you are a fan of a team that is fighting relegation it certainly gives every game more meaning but also more pain. In the US, where teams haven't been in existence since the 1800's and fan loyalties aren't entrenched into generations of families relegation could be even more damaging to US teams. Many fans wouldn't simply be disappointed but stay with a relegated team...they would do what US Euro fans do....they would pick a winner to be their new team. (How many US fans, without actual ties to a Euro team are fans of, and follow a lower table or a D2 team in Europe? How many follow MU, ManCity, Barca etc?) If Houston were relegated last year many of thier fans might have chosen Atlanta to be their new team and now that Atlanta seems on the way to relegation they could already be in the process of switching to DC United or LAG. That wouldn't happen in England to the degree it would likely happen here. Now, if you aren't willing to admit that there is a certain amount of uncertainty in the potential results, than I don't know what to say. If you are willing to admit that there is some uncertainty, it stands to reason that intelligent people might have differing views on the actual outcome. One side or the other might be more right than the other but neither side is likely to be 100% correct.
     
    Pegasus repped this.
  20. ChrisSSBB

    ChrisSSBB Member+

    Jun 22, 2005
    NV
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Wut? Well, those were Clint’s rapping days but I sure don’t remeber that story going around.
     
    nobody and Mahtzo1 repped this.
  21. bsky22

    bsky22 Member+

    Dec 8, 2003
    Why isnt there a practical way to implement? It seems pretty straight forward to me.

    Sure there would be uncertainty, but is any of what you pointed out that bad? Teams having to fight for fans seems like a good thing to me.

    Any other negatives besides implementation (which I'd like clarification on) and fan loyalty?
     
  22. Mahtzo1

    Mahtzo1 Member+

    Jan 15, 2007
    So Cal
    How do you suggest they deal with the single entity plan and franchise fee (or whatever they call it?) Does each team have to pay a fee when they move up? Do they get a full or partial refund when they move down? That's just one off the top of my head. If you have a good idea, let's hear it. You say it seems pretty straight forward. Remember, regardless of how much you despise the MLS owners, it has to satisfy them.

    Let's look at the Revolution, for example. If we had relegation they would be a prime candidate for D2 next year. Do you think Kraft would allow that? Regardless of what you say about him now and how he is running the Revolution, he was one of the main reasons that MLS is still in existence. I know he didn't just do it out of the kindness in his heart...he is a business man first but I can't see him agreeing to a system that potentially would send the Revs to D2. How many other owners would feel the same way? It's kind of hard and impractical to have pro/rel in MLS if the owners don't want it.

    Perhaps you know something that I don't that implies the majority might want it? (I don't even know what type of majority it would have to be? Simple majority? 2/3?).

    You seem to be much more passionate about pro/rel than myself. I can think of a few positives and negatives (all off the top of my head). I'm really not that interested in going too far past that. You should already have a list of positives AND negatives of each system. I hope you don't believe relegation (or any system) is perfect or that any system is 100% bad. That would indicate a severe lack of balanced thought on your part. ANY choice is a compromise. The correct choice depends upon weighing the positives and negatives and coming to a conclusion of the overall merits of the systems. (of course each person has a slightly different idea of what he/she wants and that also colors the argument)


    1. the uncertainty part is where different people can come to different conclusions. 3 basic possibilities a) one person is more correct. b) the other person is more correct c) neither person is very correct

    2. teams having to fight for fans isn't necessarily a bad thing. Teams losing all their fans could be disastrous for that team and potentially damaging to the game as a whole. Teams losing their fans could be likened to financial bankruptcy. (fans, of course being the major assets of a team...without them they are nothing.) Obviously bankruptcy is bad for the individual company and many see it as a positive in that it weeds out the weak and inefficient companies. Where it becomes more difficult to assess is how that bankruptcy can affect the rest of the economy. If we had enforced bankruptcies in business, that would be like relegation. A good thing? who knows? I haven't even thought of it like this until now.
     
  23. ChrisSSBB

    ChrisSSBB Member+

    Jun 22, 2005
    NV
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    majspike and Marko72 repped this.
  24. bsky22

    bsky22 Member+

    Dec 8, 2003
     
  25. gunnerfan7

    gunnerfan7 Member+

    SJ Earthquakes/Arsenal
    United States
    Jul 22, 2012
    Pleasanton, California
    Club:
    Arsenal FC
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Bah, don't we have players who play in MLS in his position?
     

Share This Page