NGR: How fast do we want MLS to grow?

Discussion in 'LA Galaxy' started by skydog, Apr 23, 2013.

  1. skydog

    skydog Member+

    Aug 1, 1999
    Durham, NC
    Club:
    Los Angeles Galaxy
    (I'm posting this here rather than in MLS General just because I would rather read the thoughts of the posters on this board than the "thoughts" of the riff-raff over there. :eek: But if it is inappropriate to post the thread here feel free to move it Mr/Ms. Mod.)

    We all know the financial argument for slow steady growth, which may or may not be valid. But I saw a comment the other day which made me think about a non-financial argument for the tortoise rather than the hare approach. I'm sure this argument has been made by others but I just haven't seen it.

    I believe the comment was referring to England and the EPL -it's immaterial - but lets assume it was. The comment was lamenting the fact that England's soccer development and the national team were suffering because the EPL had become so rich that it was essentially a world all star league. Net result is that EPL makes for great viewing but isn't so great for the development of soccer players in England since fewer and fewer of them - especially the younger ones - can sniff the field or become famous in their own country. Too little room when competing for spots with the best players from all over the world, the best Russians, French, Brazilians, Peruvians, and so on. Now I don't know if this is a valid argument in England because they have decent quality and semi-decently paying 2nd and 3rd tier leagues for these young English players to grow in and out of if possible.

    But the US is different. If you play in the US but don't play in MLS you are basically playing for subsistence wages or worse. So its kind of MLS or bust here.

    So my question is if the next few years MLS suddenly had a $10-50 million salary cap would American players like Zardes, McBean, Cochrane, Villarreal, etc. be on any MLS roster? And if they were would they get opportunities to be getting first team playing time like they are now? Would the next Wondo ever get the chance to become super-Wondo? How about late bloomers like Cameron, would they be given a chance to bloom? Or would they play a couple years for a USL team (or whatever the lower league is called now) and then give up the starving route and get a "real job?" If teams could afford to fill their starting roster and some of their bench with either 200-400k/yr players from South America or maybe 28-29 year old really good EPL veteranswhy would a coach be drafting Meyers. How many injuries would have to happen before McBean got any first team playing time?

    The 8 international roster slots per team (unless traded) mitigates the problem somewhat. But I believe LA is only using 5 of their international slots now and in fact most of the MLS teams have unused slots. But given more $ to spend I'm pretty sure those slots get utilized that could easily mean 7 or 8 non-Americans starting for an average MLS team plus a few non-American born that have become naturalized. That wouldn't leave much room on the field for young unproven American players to get playing time. And as the bench quality improved even the US players who are on the roster will find getting playing time more difficult. This year for example if LA had a stronger bench we probably wouldn't be dipping down to the McBean, Cochrane, or Meyer levels because of an injured starter or two.

    It is true that some determined young US players would stay at it trying to work up from the lower leagues or reserve squad games. But their play then will be mostly invisible to the average fan. Who knows how many kids have been inspired by seeing Wondo go from Chico State to part time MLS player to DP status. And I'm sure that the the success players like Villarreal are having with LA at this moment is inspiring more than one 10-15 year old player in Southern California as I write this. Do we want those great US player stories to be even more rare?

    So I'm saying there is a non-financial argument for building the league quality slowly and steadily, for not outpacing the growth of the sport in the US and the improving quality (hopefully) of US players. Because if we start paying even at Liga MX levels too soon we may find ourselves flipping channels like crazy on weekends if we want to see an MLS team with more than a one or two up and coming young Americans on the field.

    Just sayin'. Thoughts?
     
    respite_cdd, hav77 and TrickHog repped this.
  2. jmaestro

    jmaestro Member+

    Mar 27, 2008
    Bakersfield
    Club:
    Los Angeles Galaxy
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Skydog, I think this is a BigSoccer first: a post I actually want to take a couple of days to think about.

    One counter-thought to throw into the mix: would a higher paying league induce more American kids to play soccer if they knew if they were good they could make a million bucks a year even without being the star of the team?
     
  3. barroldinho

    barroldinho Member+

    Man Utd and LA Galaxy
    England
    Aug 13, 2007
    US/UK dual citizen in HB, CA
    Club:
    Manchester United FC
    Nat'l Team:
    England
    :eek:

    Intelligent, thought-provoking discussion that with logical, practical and philosophical elements? Surely there's something in the Bigsoccer Terms of Service that prohibits such behaviour?

    I'll....erm.... get back to you.

    Though as an aside, while foreign talent isn't exactly condusive to getting young English talent on the field, having experienced youth soccer first hand there, the foreigners are just the latest in a long line of excuses for why England grossly underachieve at the international level. Just look how successful our Nats were when our clubs - complete with mostly homegrown players - dominated Europe in the 70s and early 80s.
     
  4. Hachiko

    Hachiko The Akita on Big Soccer

    Jun 8, 2005
    Long Beach, CA
    Club:
    Los Angeles Galaxy
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    We're selling our Academy guys and opening our wallets. End of story.
     
  5. ssanchez

    ssanchez Member

    Oct 15, 2000
    Club:
    Los Angeles Galaxy
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Riiiiiiiiight, very insightful analysis.
     
    generaladmissision18 and jmaestro repped this.
  6. The Cadaver

    The Cadaver It's very quiet here.

    Oct 24, 2000
    La Cañada, CA
    Club:
    Los Angeles Galaxy
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    I guess part of how a person responds to this is a function of what one sees the purpose of the league to be. If the objective is to develop American players (presumably for the good of the Nats) then there would be a concern as outlined. If the objective is merely to build the best league we can, not so much.

    Does it really matter if the players on the field are "American" or not? If the objective of the league is to become a powerful first quality league, than the nationality of the player pool really is a secondary consideration. Maybe not a consideration at all.

    BPL does not seem to have suffered as an entertaining league and financial powerhouse as a result of having fewer native-born players, does it? There is still a passionate following for the clubs. I don't see the English public turning their backs on teams because the teams are not English-enough. Why would we think that would happen here? Are we more jingoistic than the English? Maybe.

    Project 2022 may be unrealistic, but that is the espoused goal of the league. It is fair to recognize that there is a tension between that objective and developing American players for the Nats.
     
    Cyclonis, TrickHog and jmaestro repped this.
  7. ssanchez

    ssanchez Member

    Oct 15, 2000
    Club:
    Los Angeles Galaxy
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    How dare you, now I have to respond with intelligence. I am gonna have to take a nap after this.
    Cadaver did a very good job outlining the contradictory goals of MLS. To be one of the best leagues in the world you would have to increase the budget and buy some of the best players in the world. Now if we take it at face value that the league wants to advance soccer in the US, then you do up the cash a bit more to try and keep star players at home but invest much more in youth academies and prioritize the development of home grown players, sometimes sacrificing what would be a better player here.
    Lets look at LA as an example: Villareal and McBean have started playing with the first team more consistently. It didn however start happening until Beckham and Donovan where not in the picture. With those two in the picture the Midfield is full so is the partner for Keane. I believe that there playing with the first team has made them mature faster and given rise to Villareal. If we had a depth of lets say 3 Keanes up front do we give Villareal even a chance during regular season play. They may sniff some minutes in cup play or friendlies but not the minutes they are getting right now.
    For my preference I would like to keep developing our young talent and try and keep more high level americans here. I am over the insecurities of others judging our league. F them they can watch what they want I will watch my home town team. I think increasing the Salary by 1 million should provide for a nice living and keep good talent at home and also have room for stars to make big bucks. In short I like what we are doing just speed it a little but don't go crazy.
     
    galaxydeadhead and TrickHog repped this.
  8. jmaestro

    jmaestro Member+

    Mar 27, 2008
    Bakersfield
    Club:
    Los Angeles Galaxy
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    And this is a counter-argument in a nutshell. Cadaver, I do not disagree with your point at all.

    However, I would argue that a majority (although not sure how large of a majority) of MLS fans are also USMNT fans. I realize there are MLS fans that (a) believe in Club Over Country (what I believe to be a small slice, however) and (b) fans of other national teams, but I am going to make a generalization (I know, I know, I am opening myself up to heavy critique by doing so) that Americans immigrants who still strongly associate with their former homelands tend to be less interested in MLS and more in their home leagues and/or the big European leagues.

    I could be dead wrong about this, and the pie chart could look totally different than I think it does. Hard to know without a thorough survey. But I would say that some sort of a majority of MLS fans would agree that one of the purposes of the league is to grow USMNT players.
     
  9. Hachiko

    Hachiko The Akita on Big Soccer

    Jun 8, 2005
    Long Beach, CA
    Club:
    Los Angeles Galaxy
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    More like a hard and fast solution. Quick-trigger. And MLS should go for slow-growth instead of following the way of the NASL.
     
  10. ielag

    ielag Member+

    Jul 20, 2010
    The league would be growing at a much faster rate if the national TV ratings were there, but they're simply not. Those TV contracts are now the most important thing to the growth of the league since pretty much all the stadiums have been built with a couple exceptions.

    The TV contracts are up after next season, and networks seem to be overpaying these past few years for sports rights because of the fact they're a live event in the DVR age.
     
    Cyclonis repped this.
  11. The Cadaver

    The Cadaver It's very quiet here.

    Oct 24, 2000
    La Cañada, CA
    Club:
    Los Angeles Galaxy
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    I think we understand that the league wants to be financially prudent and not go down the road of NASL. Frankly, I am comfortable that the league is now a stable operation for the most part and is run in a sound way.

    That's not the question that's being posed. Here's the situation: assume that the league actually could grow (and I'm talking quality, not quantity) faster and still be on a sound financial footing. IF one of the side effects of that growth would be to slow the development of American players, do we want to do it? Is it worth it? In other words, should the league be asked to keep itself under wraps for the good of the national team?

    I think it is unrealistic to expect that kind of altruism on the part of the owners or the fans. Project 2022 tells me that the decision has already been made. The league wants to improve to being a world class powerhouse - realistic or not, that IS the objective. I think the league has decided already that the development of US players is to be an incidental benefit and not a primary objective.

    As a fan, I want to see good soccer 18 to 20 times a year in my home stadium. If I can also see quality from the Nats (realistically what, once or twice a year live in So Cal?) great. If it happens that the Nats don't get better as fast, too bad. But to me there's no contest: being at the stadium week in week out and seeing first rate soccer is so much more important than the once every four years tournament. Others may value the rare occasion to see the Nats more than I do. But I really think that the pleasure that a full stadium of fans gets from week in week out quality soccer is more important to a lot of people - even if they don't consciously see it that way.
     
    galaxydeadhead, Cyclonis and Hachiko repped this.
  12. Hachiko

    Hachiko The Akita on Big Soccer

    Jun 8, 2005
    Long Beach, CA
    Club:
    Los Angeles Galaxy
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    If the league grows in quality, we still need to bring in some accomplished European talent to secure the bottom line. Personally, I don't care where my players come from, as long as they have the skills to win, they can be from Planet Neptune and if they have the skills, my hunger for top-quality football is satisfied. But I don't see the development of American players being slowed at all. I see the rate being constant.
     
  13. Cyclonis

    Cyclonis Forza Juve

    Jul 12, 2007
    Los Angeles
    Club:
    Juventus FC
    Nat'l Team:
    Italy
    I have always wanted the MLS to take over the mantle of 'The World League' but right now would be happy if teams actually spent within the 3 DP limit they have now.

    Will it hurt the national team if the league takes on a more international based theme? Probably.. But then for me, the Galaxy is my USMNT. To reach the next level of TV contracts the league is going to have to bring in more stars.. So be it!
     
    phoenixhazard and galaxydeadhead repped this.
  14. The Cadaver

    The Cadaver It's very quiet here.

    Oct 24, 2000
    La Cañada, CA
    Club:
    Los Angeles Galaxy
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Wouldn't it be great if our league was so strong that budding US cream-of-the-crop players had to go to Denmark or Sweden or Holland to hone their skills so they could come back and get a place in one of the best leagues on the world? Right now we keep hearing "He has to go to Europe so he can develop for the Nats." I want to hear "He has to play in MLS to develop for the Nats."
     
  15. respite_cdd

    respite_cdd BigSoccer Supporter

    Feb 12, 2009
    Harrison, NJ
    Club:
    Los Angeles Galaxy
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    IIRC, one of the reasons for MLS was to have a place to develop talent for the USMNT. That said, this freakishly well thought out question is, at this point in our national development, simply Club v. Country writ large.

    If the USSF works on developing viable lower-divisions (in my wholly amateur opinion, this would best look either like Germany's Regionalligen or Baseball's Minor Leagues), while MLS works on building itself into the best top-division league it can, money will flow and talent will follow the money. While that's all sorting itself out, however, the OP's concern is an important one, and one that's discussed not nearly as often as it ought to be.
     
  16. phoenixhazard

    phoenixhazard Member+

    Oct 26, 2010
    Seattle, WA
    Club:
    Tottenham Hotspur FC
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Good points. Sure the EPL is all non british but you can't discount Spain, Italy, France, and Germany who are all TOP TOP leagues and the vast majority of their players are from that country.
     
    skydog repped this.
  17. MPNumber9

    MPNumber9 Member+

    Oct 10, 2010
    Club:
    Los Angeles Galaxy
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Hard to argue with the success of a league like Germany after this week's results.

    Sustainable growth is the name of the game. More leagues will adopt MLS-type rules than the reverse going forward, I'll bet (many already are). They only reason they haven't is because the biggest teams in those leagues have long fought it. But the structure of the top leagues is really backwards and mired in corruption. It's always been weird to me that anyone would want MLS to model itself after those leagues.
     
  18. phoenixhazard

    phoenixhazard Member+

    Oct 26, 2010
    Seattle, WA
    Club:
    Tottenham Hotspur FC
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    eh i doubt they will adopt the mls model completely, there are a lot of really bad things about it. the single entity system would halt so much development and growth and kill incentive to breed the worlds top players. Salary cap may be implemented eventually but it will be a very loose and big one. You can't just change things in these leagues because soccer is a global sport and if you institute a salary cap in spain for example then all the good players will just go somewhere else for more money.
     
  19. phoenixhazard

    phoenixhazard Member+

    Oct 26, 2010
    Seattle, WA
    Club:
    Tottenham Hotspur FC
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Interesting thing i just thought of:

    How much is the single entity hurting us?

    It kills every possibility of MLS teams signing top players from other MLS teams, this would be happening a lot since we are the top team in the league and if you want to win silverware we are the best chance a player's got. Anyway, doesn't transfers like this of good players going to better teams within a league help build these star players too? There are plenty of top players in our league with shitty teams and if they were playing with much better teammates that would make them much better thereby making them "stars" and keeping them in MLS at the same time.

    ie: Imagine how much bigger Wondo would be in the media if he played for the Galaxy...
     
  20. MPNumber9

    MPNumber9 Member+

    Oct 10, 2010
    Club:
    Los Angeles Galaxy
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    To determine whether or not something is "helping" or "hurting" us, we must define our goals. Wondo wouldn't be a lock-starter for a team like ours, so it could actually hamper his development and renown. In fact, this is precisely what you see in top leagues. Players that could be stars on smaller teams are warming the bench behind starters on top teams. This not only contributes to league imbalances (top teams horde all the best resources instead of spreading the wealth around) but it results in resource waste for everyone invovled: the players, teams and fans.

    I actually wrote an essay about this awhile back. People say sports teams should be run like businesses, in a free-market environment etc. I guess people forget that every business in the world hates competition, which is kinda the cornerstone of an entertaining and viable sports league. The big clubs abroad have done an excellent job of destroying competition in their leagues.
     
    Geneva and The Cadaver repped this.
  21. 73Bruin

    73Bruin Member+

    Jul 12, 2008
    Torrance, California
    I don't think that the goals of improving the USMNT and MLS simultaneously are incompatible. I do think that rules relative to developing homegrown players especially need to be changed to increase the incentives for having MLS clubs support their academies (I have posted about this previously on other threads). Increasing the incentives for MLS teams to have USL farm teams or partners is also something that should be looked at.

    On the other hand, I am not sure that convinced that having an unlimited number of DP's would result in significantly more revenue. This is something TL probably had correct. Conversely, IMO, that having more USMNT members in the MLS would help advertise the league among people who follow the national team only. Consequently, I could see making USMNT members automatic DP's.
     
  22. phoenixhazard

    phoenixhazard Member+

    Oct 26, 2010
    Seattle, WA
    Club:
    Tottenham Hotspur FC
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    That's not 100% true at all. PLENTY of top players move to a big team and thrive and become world class stars. Not all but some do. In our situation that is not even possible.

    I disagree with Wondo, he would start next to Keane easily with Landon in the midfield. In fact he might even be a better player here with the players we have around him.
     
  23. MPNumber9

    MPNumber9 Member+

    Oct 10, 2010
    Club:
    Los Angeles Galaxy
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    What exactly would you change?
     
  24. MPNumber9

    MPNumber9 Member+

    Oct 10, 2010
    Club:
    Los Angeles Galaxy
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Real Madrid's bench in the Dortmund match: Iker Casillas, Karim Benzema, Kaka', Angel diMaria.

    Anyone of those players could be stars for smaller La Liga clubs (or clubs anywhere, really) and probably make those leagues more interesting to watch. I'd argue it's easier for a great player to stand out a smaller club anyway, wouldn't you?

    Maybe the example you used just wasn't very good. I mean, it's not like Wondo plays for a poor team. SJ won the SS and nearly went to the final last year. Would he really get a significant surge in popularity/development from playing in LA?

    Maybe. I'm not convinced he'd do as well in our system/style as he does at SJ.
     
  25. 73Bruin

    73Bruin Member+

    Jul 12, 2008
    Torrance, California
    Here is the sum of my previous posts (sorry to others for the duplication)

    1) I would like to see the cap lifted almost entirely for true home grown players (3+ years in a team's academy). By almost entirely, I am thinking that if their salary exceeds the league average for non-DP players, they should cost no more than that average. However, teams should be restricted from taking out loans to fund operating expenses including salaries. At the same time, I would change transfer rules for these players so that sale of such a player returns the entire transfer fee to the club that developed the player with the money to be spent in any manner the club wants.

    This would allow clubs to really utilize their academies. Teams that wanted to be frugal and sell their players could use the money to increase their allocation, use it for their academy or just increase their non-shared revenues. Teams that wanted to be ambitious, could grow as long as their revenues could cover their costs. <Editorial Note: I would also allow a team that funds USL teams to open academies in the cities those USL teams reside in.>

    2) I would really like to see MLS add allocation money to teams that have USMNT players on them for participation bonuses. Perhaps 25K per game selected and 75K per game started. This would enable MLS clubs to be more competitive on salaries and hopefully be able to keep more of the players in the MLS. <Editorial Note: Since SUM gets revenues from the Television rights to USMNT games and MLS owners own SUM this makes a certain amount of sense to me.>

    3) Finally I would like to see a way to keep non-academy US team players in the US by making it possible to have additional DP's for these players (without the cap hit). The goal is to enhance the quality of play in the US by keeping key players in MLS. Call it the Omar rule if you want.
     
    Geneva and MPNumber9 repped this.

Share This Page