Also worth noting that "bullpen shrapnel" notwithstanding, we just won the WBC with a stacked US lineup missing a ton of top players. Even with a "B" team, the US had a lineup of I think 9 or 10 Gold Glovers, with good hitting up and down the lineup (perhaps a little light on power, Adam Jones and a couple others excepted). If we cared about international competition, and weren't producing a ton of good players anyway, we would be hearing about "too many foreigners". And fans wouldn't mind, because they'd just expect every team to abide by whatever the new regs were. If play quality dropped to Single A or AA levels, then perhaps people would want foreign talent, to improve the quality of play.
Here is some analysis on which schools have delivered the most players to the USMNT and the USWNT http://the18.com/news/university-has-put-more-players-men’s-and-women’s-national-teams-any-other
This past week saw the worst numbers of the year (~41% US-eligible) thanks largely due to US players being released for international duty before those of other NTs. YTD it's a little shy of 44% US-eligible and about 48.4% among players who have been playing soccer in the US since high school or earlier.
Do you have the overall season's numbers and how they compare to previous seasons? Is there much of a difference between tracking minutes, starts and appearances? Thanks!
At this time last year, both numbers were approximately four percentage points higher. However, last year US numbers climbed over the spring and then started to decline after the summer transfer window, whereas they have largely stayed steady in 2017. The percentage of US-eligible starts is about a half a percentage point lower than US-eligible minutes.
That's the thing. Some suggest all we need is time. Um, with time the league is actively moving away from Americans. Increased spending is directed directly at foreigners. Time doesn't solve this. It's 100% intentional.
MLS/SUM doesnt care about the USMNT!!! In fact, that is why the USMNT is at its lowest point in MLS' history. Most MLS games this opening weekend had ZERO USMNT prospects on the field....or, at best 1 or 2. going through all the starting lineups, most teams have 1 or 2 americans starting....and as a USMNT fan....I don't like it. If other countries just let any USMNT player come and play without restriction, I wouldnt mind. but countries like EPL Spain italy etc all have strict limits/bans on US/non-eu players....so I want MLS to protect american players as well. I think we've actually reached a tipping point where it is not easier for americans to play in MLS than it is for americans to play abroad...which is sad. to me, it has NOTHING to do with quality or skill either....it's just economic factors. MLS/SUM cares more about limiting salaries of American players in MLS than the state of the sport in the country. MLS fans dont care....thats the biggest problem. if MLS fans starting making noise about protecting US players in MLS...things would change. but MLS fans (collectively) don't realize how important protecting usmnt players in MLS is....or they just dont care....either way...its bad times for USMNT in MLS, atm.
And 27% of a 23 team league is more than enough spots for the players of real international quality in the US pool. What those guys need is a high level of competition, and the South American infusion is going to provide that to a much higher degree than college senior duffers like MLS of old. Meanwhile, the development of USL should keep the US player pool miles bigger than it was 10 years ago. None of this fixes the financial incentives of youth development question of course, but it's a step in the right direction nonetheless.
If MLS/SUM?USSF was smart they would make one of the new expansion teamn in MLS an all-american team a la chivas in MExico....
no one thought christian roldan was international quality before he played in MLS....it was only after he got a few years of steady playing time in MLS that people thought that.... there's plenty of players in MLS who could be more...but only if they get the chance first. the problem isnt ability...it's opportunity.
The opportunities are meaningless if the quality of play in the league is garbage. USMNT could choose 5 full rosters of MLS guys getting regular playing time, to say nothing of players abroad. Opportunity is not an issue. This is nothing like the situation in England where their very best young talents can't get a game.
Its less than 70 players, 69 to be exact. We've called up 55 players to our NT within the last 12 months from MLS. You are telling me there's enough disparity there? Any American who can start in MLS is pretty much in with a shout for the NT? And I think the 55 number is probably a little high. A lot of experimental call ups in that mix, and Arena did call up a high number of MLS'ers, but the number keeps going down. We have 3 squads of starters within the league. In comparison to those numbers, the Premier League, which is routinely cited as a league where domestic players don't get enough of a chance, had 29% of English starters for the first week. MLS is now worse than the Premier League, and its not even a top league, like the Premier League is. MLS signs mediocre foreign talent, the Premier League signs the best foreign talent.
What would be a problem would be if really outstanding precocious young players were being blocked by expensive foreigners and had no other options. England is in that situation for 3 reasons: 1. Their best young talents are concentrated on a small number of teams 2. That small handful of clubs have the money to buy the absolute best players in the world 3. English players are insanely reluctant to ever go abroad and play. The USMNT has none of those three problems. What is a gigantic problem for the USMNT is the low standard of play in MLS not forcing its domestic players to challenge themselves and maximize their ability. What's happening in the league now is a happy medium between improving the latter problem while still being well short of any real issues with the former.
My response would be, then stop taking USSF dollars and using the USMNT as an MLS proxy/marketing arm. Also, if MLS did a good job developing players, instead of simply purchasing South American talent, we wouldn't be so mad at them for failing to develop American players.
Its actually 31%, to correct myself. I wasn't aware three teams hadn't played, I thought only one hadn't.
pretty soon ...an american starting in MLS will be as noteworthy as an american starting in a top euro league (meanwhile MLS will still likely be looked down upon as inferior).
i dont disagree with your predication... but, at the same time... lawsuits for what???! why should foreign workers' rights be protected in the USA...especially when USA workers' rights are not protected in foreign countries.... labor law in the usa bassackwards AF.
When they calculate this number, how do they handle the Canadian teams? Are Americans who play on Canadian teams included? What would happen if Canadian players were included (probably not much, but I don't know). MLS having Canadian players doesn't help the USMNT, but some people are arguing that MLS is anti-domestic players, and Canadian players are functionally domestic to the league.
I would think the fairest way to make that calculation would be to "count" both US and Canadian players on the Canadian teams, the idea being that those teams combine both the MLS' interest in developing American talent and an interest unique to those clubs in developing Canadian talent. To whatever extent those clubs are prioritizing Canadians, that would represent opportunity for the "domestic" player, which is the thing we're attempting to measure.
I think I'm kind of a moderate on this issue. I don't think there is a positive spin to put on this trend of decreasing American starters from the USMNT point of view. For the long term success of the USMNT, that trends needs to be reversed. However, I'm willing to be a little patient on this. MLS is expanding rapidly while simultaneously trying to increase the level of play and trying to spend more on salaries. Coaches (other than in places like Philly and DC apparently) are under more pressure to get results. The academies seem to be gradually improving, but probably not quick enough to churn out players who meet the continually higher bar to be a starter in the league. And the cream of the crop with regard to domestic youth talent is getting snapped up by Euro clubs. So, right now it's kind of a perfect storm of conditions for fewer American starters. I'm willing to give it a couple years to see if things can reach a better equilibrium state.
Yep. You want your NT players to be playing at a very high level and the EPL qualifies. That's why it's a problem in England. If the players won't go to another top league, the EPL is the only option. MLS is not a top league so we want to send our best players to Europe if they can get playing time at a good team in a good league. Asking about the percentage in MLS misses the point. If there is a problem, it would be measured this way: how many players in Europe would you rather have back in MLS and how many players in MLS are national team caliber but not playing? A handful? Now, maybe (certainly) we need to be developing better players, but that's a different problem with a different solution.