In any case, there are already secondary level CONCACAF club competitions specifically for teams from Central America (Copa Centroamericana de CONCACAF) and from the Caribbean (the CONCACAF Caribbean Cup and CFU Club Shield). Would they be better/more sustainable by making them region wide and adding the 7th best teams from Mexico and MLS? I doubt it.
Would you feel better if I had said "So of the two biggest leagues in CONCACAF Liga MX fans might care, MLS fans largely don't"? At this point you're intentionally trying to misconstrue my statements, which was itself just a precursor to my overall point. I'm done trying to "clarify" this for you.
Right if only it was that simple. https://www.espn.com/soccer/story/_...club-leon-rescheduled-wednesday-plane-problem
Yes, CCL was important for teams so they could reach CWC. Pachuca, America, Cruz Azul, Chivas, Monterrey, Tigres all made significant moves to bring players to be able to compete at that level. Tigres being the closest making a CWC final. Up until the last 6 years CCL was easy mode that LigaMX could run their academy and completely dominate. Also, it is the reason why many want libertadores back because Mexican teams were deep. Competing in CCL, Libertadores and Sudamericana, league with pro/reg forced Mexican teams to have significantly deep teams. All of that has gone away because league executives are greedy and want to follow the ponzi mls scheme to make a quick buck.
So the game was rescheduled because the Mexican team’s training and prep was interrupted. Sounds like sporting integrity.
Yeah, one thing is that the Central American and even a couple of Caribbean clubs were a little more competitive then. As an partial aside, this is evidence that the fact that MLS still hasn't caught up to LMX doesn't mean they're standing still. The two leagues have left the rest of the region in the dust. But I think the main thing is that it wasn't so much the tournament that nobody cared about, but most of the matches. It was a 'play your B squad until the semis' kind of thing. I look at the tournament now and I'd say that in the octo-final round, 7 of the 8 matchups featured real quality, whereas the equivalent knockout/group stage back in the day was mostly junk. Only the Galaxy-Mount Pleasant matchup fit that descriptor this year, where an MLS team that might be slightly charitably described as mediocre (and that themselves got rolled the next round) totally waltzed past competition that really should not be there. And that has a lot to do with having only 2 non-MLS/LMX teams in it. (The other one, Central America's rep Alajualense, did themselves no dishonor against LAFC, though they did not advance.) And that's why it can actually make money now, because most of the matchups are strong. If I were offering a hot take, it's that I think MLS is probably better than LMX was X years ago, but they haven't stood still either, and we should never have expected them to.
All semi-finalists had a CCC hangover this weekend, with only Nashville avoiding defeat (just barely with an 89th minute equalizer): Nashville - DC United 2:2 LAFC - Houston 1:4 Chivas - Tigres 2:0 Pachuca - Toluca 2:0 This means both, Tigres and Toluca are eliminated from the Liguilla and now have three weeks to prepare for the final. And certainly Tigres are going to need it to succeed at the Bombonera. In related news, Concacaf have extended the one-sided final advantage to the Women's game. Here it's based on even less games. Just four instead of six. Concacaf revamps W Champions Cup format from 2027 - Inside World Football Still hoping for a return to the two-legged final. Especially if the Caribbean champions keep getting a bye into the R16. (That's a gift-wrapped six points for a lucky team).
Tom Bogert and the Sporting Directors he has interviewed suggested what I have said in another thread here. But for some reason in other threads people want to keep insisting on designation and all these other xAM nonsense. It's simple; put a max cap, exlcude transfer fees from the salary cap, leave 1 or 2 DP spots for your Messi, Son type players which there isn't many, and get rid of TAM, GAM, U22-I, HG territory rights etc. Hire Liga MX Sporting Directors as they have experience on not overspending and going bankrupt if owners are concerned the current MLS Sporting Directors are too stupid to manage the money of a team. It looks simple but somehow MLS will find a way in the next CBA to make things more complicated and come up with some new invented xAM and some other invented designation like the "Legacy DP" they were suggesting 2 or 3 years ago. They'll think those changes are great and run with them for another 10 years. Some fans will defend the changes and say MLS is on the verge of greatness.
Then they shouldn't be handled this way. Any exceptions should be built in such a way that there's reasonably enough players to fill the exception for every team in the league. Yes, some team (probably Miami/LA/NY/etc.) is going to get the big name Son's and Messi's but there needs to be a way for teams to counteract that with lesser but still known quality names.
There aren't 30 Messi or Son's around the world to have them all in MLS and even if there were not every single of the 30 MLS teams are all willing to spend big on a player no matter what type of marketing they bring. I don't know what you are asking.
A few years ago Liga MX was the financial wild west. They seem to have turned things around as America and Chivas are in amongst European and MLS clubs in terms of valuation.
You missed my point (badly). There shouldn't be an exception that only applies to the Messi's/Son's of the world. That's going backwards to the pre-DP era where "special circumstances" allowed certain teams to get the Luis Hernandez's or having Carlos Valderrama moved between teams by fiat. Any exception to the rule needs to be broad enough that 30 (or 60 if there's going to be 2 per team) players who could reasonably be signed by MLS could qualify for it.
They are attempting to reform their model to a more MLS franchise fee. But they are also working closely to manage Revenue and payout like the Premier League. Whether it happens or not (premier league model) is to be seen, so far unifying TV rights has been a failure. This isn't as easy because the base level/homegrown level of the player still needs to improve.
When Messi or Son are used as an example it means those that will be above the cap or would eat a lot of the cap space of the $20M salary cap space that was suggested in the video. For example players like Almiron and Miranchuk who are being paid $7.8M and $4.8M a year, respectively, would eat a lot of cap space. More than half the cap would be used on those 2 players in Atlanta if what is suggested in the video of having a cap space of $20M for the entire roster is done. To avoid that and depending how much cap space you have left that's when you use the "DP" spot either on one or both. Almiron and Miranchuk are no Messi or Son yet would fit that profile based on their high salaries. You will still have the $20M for the rest of the roster once you get 1 or 2 salaries excluded from the cap if "DP" spots are used. If what was suggested in the video is done at one point there will be cases, for example like Colorado Rapids, that the salaries for the ENTIRE roster, including the highest paid players, where it won't exceed the $20M salary cap. Last year Colorado's over all salaries was $14.6M and that included their highest paid players, Paxten Aaronson and Rafael Navarro, at $2.2M and $1.4M a year respectively. That would've left Colorado still with a $5.4M salary cap space left unused and/or to be used as they see fit for more additions plus the DP spots if in case they go over. That's what they are talking about when saying keep 1 or 2 "DP"s. Not everyone will need DPs, not everyone will always use DPs, just like they do now. Can't force everyone to overspend if they don't want to but the option will be there for those that do.
The MLS homegrown players are getting better. They just aren't staying in MLS like most in Liga MX do. We have MLS HG players going to Liga MX. That wasn't happening before. Others going to Europe. It's good for USMNT but for MLS it's taking a hit on their domestic quality by them not staying. How can they stay? By offering better pay just like they do with Mexicans in Liga MX. Sure, some would rather leave if it means less pay but a lot will stay for the pay.
They’re getting better but your overall average still has a lot of room for improvement. Lots of youngsters leave LigaMX as well but they also have the cushion to fall back on a decent pay in LigaMX if they are good enough to stay in 1st division.
They also need better developmental pathways. The current setup with Next Pro doesn’t work well, and USL isn’t at a good enough level for young players to benefit much from loans.
He’s reached that stage where he doesn’t have any interest in a real back and forth discussion. Hes trying to “win” an argument.
MLS doesn’t have the same goals as you. By their own goals, the league is a phenomenal success. You’re like someone going to a Mexican restaurant and then complaining about the sushi.