But we live in 2026. Players play for money. I mean I'm glad lifelong Notts County fan James Belshaw got a chance to play for his club but he had to wait until he was 37. More typical is lifelong Notts County fan David McGoldrick. He left the club at 16 for Southampton after 4 appearances, returned aged 36 after spells at numerous clubs (including the enemy across the Trent) then left again, aged 38, after the club refused to meet his salary demands. That's about as far as loyalty goes these days. Isak was kissing the Newcastle badge on his shirt two years ago. Then he went on strike.
That’s too bad, at least in Mexico we know that’s the initial dream and eventually Europe if they are good enough. One of Chivas biggest story this season is how all the players including the dual nats were deep fans of the team. I think eventually MLS will see it. My little nephew is a huge Chivas and Houston Dynamo fan. It takes time to get there. Maybe in the next generation it will happen.
But how many players would stay at Mazatlan or Atlas if America or Chivas came a knocking? Loyalty is easier of you're a top player at a top club.
MLS 2026 Payrolls, updated today by Capology Liga MX 2025/26 Payrolls Capology wants you to pay to get Liga MX details but based on the grid I assume that Monterrey are just under the $45M mark (including bonuses) These are estimates. I suspect the bonus number for MLS is actually the difference between basic and guaranteed compensation and probably doesn't include things like Leagues Cup bonuses.
Zero love. Irrelevant in my book. This can't be disputed. Top clubs also tend to pay the most too so it isn't difficult to be loyal when you add both. There are exceptions though.
Good grief…we understand it fine. We just disagree on what an improved MLS would look like. Look at this specific thread, the topic. Let’s say the next labor contract creates an MLS where the top 5 teams can’t get any better, but the 25 poorest/weakest teams get 25% better. The league would be “better.” But CCL results would stay the same. Now, let’s say the next labor contract allowed the top 5 teams to get 25% better, but the bottom 25 teams cratered down to USL level. The league would be worse but CCL results would be better. You’re going to an Italian restaurant and complaining about the sushi. This is like overrate/underrated arguments. I think those arguments are all stupid because it’s an argument with 2 variables…how good a player IS compared to how highly a player is RATED. It’s what you’re doing here…you are asserting one version of a better MLS, and others don’t agree with that vision, or at least are arguing that your vision isn’t the same as the league’s. And we are right on this, and you are wrong. So all of your suggestions are just you doubling down on something nobody else agrees about.
The league has two champions each calendar year though, right? Split seasons would be one method for MLS to change things up and increase parity…fewer matches mean more random outcomes, more variability. But I don’t think American fans would accept split seasons.
It may or may not work. If the overall goal is to have a sustainable model that improves homegrown talent then I think the current model for MLS would work because split season leads to the importance of immediate results. That generally drives less patience on players and coaching staff.
Where are you getting all those percentages from? Lol. I told you that Liga MX and Liga Argentina don't have salary caps and don't have parity. What they have are play offs. That's what creates randomness in their champions. In Argentina a club like Platense WON their first league title in their 100+ years of existence thanks to the play off format that was done a year ago and that more than half the league makes the play offs (number of teams making play offs sound familiar?) In MLS we have "OG" teams that haven't won an MLS Cup no matter how much parity and rules are added to help the slackers catch up.
You asked where the percentages come from. I answered. Let me try to explain it one more time. You know those ranking systems that work across leagues? Like OPTA and Nate Silver’s system (if he still does that.) HYPOTHETICALLY, let’s imagine a ranking system that works perfectly, a proven system without problems. Let me lay out two options for an MFL-MLS comparison. 1. The top 5 teams in the ranking are all from MLS. Then come all of the Mexican teams. And then the bottom 25 teams are all MLS. MLS teams dominate the CCL. 2. The top 5 teams are all Mexican. Then come all 32 MLS teams. The remaining Mexican teams bring up the rear. Liga MX teams dominate the CCL. Under which is MLS in “better” in a generic way, and also better than Mexico, the first or the second? For me, it’s the second. Most of the league does too. Your criticisms are all based on the idea that the first option is better. You aren’t wrong, any more than saying vanilla is better than chocolate is wrong. And that’s why this argument has become fruitless…I and others here have a different priority than you do. So arguing methods for improvement is pointless when there are two different goals.
FYI, the Opta league rankings also have categories that isolate the top 5 and top 10 clubs in a league so you can more easily make the type of comparison that you lay out in the rest of your post. The catch is that those rankings are only available for leagues that are actively in the regular season (so MLS has them right now, Liga MX doesn’t), and there’s no easy way to find archived rankings, so you can’t just jump back to April 15 to compare. But, put a pin in this for September/October when both leagues are running.
I think Silver is about to bring back the NT ratings for the WC, and I have a hazy memory but that might cause him to bring back the club rankings as well. To be fair to him, his rankings do attempt to grapple with the problem you're posing here, which is that most rating systems rank only by the best teams, because those are the only ones that do international play. It's a matter of finding things like the standard deviation in the standings to create a measure of dispersion from the best teams to the weaker ones. But your point is still taken, especially because the streets rate leagues not by these ranking systems but by the eye test, and the eye test tends to have the flaw of only looking at the good teams. And to restate it, the issue isn't that anyone doesn't know what MLS would have to do to get better--they'd have to spend more, it ain't that deep. But the problem is whether you're going to do it in the way of a rising tide that lifts all boats, or whether you're going to let a few run away from the pack. Independently of personal philosophical preference, they ain't gonna do the latter, because in MLS every team gets a vote on the spending structure.
MLS, undefeated in ranking systems! What's that, like our 40th consecutive title? I lost count. Seriously, MLS is the ultimate Champion when it comes to ranking systems, valuations and revenues.
I feel like I’m in that Monty Python argument/contradiction skit. Have fun arguing with yourself. I’ll spend my time with serious posters thinking seriously.
You cheering for billionaires to make more money. That's what you always do which I said was fine if that's your thing. Then you get upset because I don't start cheering for them like you do. That just isn't my thing.
I don't understand what that has to do with football. You live in a society where people who run sports to make money, not in a society where continuously people pump millions of their own money to keep sports teams afloat.
I’m explaining, not advocating. If I explain to a Holocaust denier how the Holocaust happened, that doesn’t make me pro Holocaust. It’s a discussion board. I appreciate it when other people explain things, especially with facts, even if I don’t agree with their views. I recognize the difference.
I was explaining too but you don't like my explanations even though I gave examples. All you gave was "owners don't care what you want". I had said that MLS is no different than Liga MX and Liga Argentina which all have the same formats yet in those 2 leagues there isn't salary caps or parity but do have play offs. Even another poster chimed in and explained how many different champs Liga MX has had in 10 years. Then you brought up league rankings for....I I'm still trying to figure it out why or how that fits into what was being talked about. Oh and by the way it all started over a suggestion Tom Bogert made in a video of what MLS should do which many pundits, Sporting Directors and fans have said many times before. So you can either talk about it or just ignore the conversation which clearly upsets you. Those are better options than saying "owners don't care about what you want" or "opta rankings has MLS higher than Liga MX".
It's not what I believe. It just doesn't. The randomness in Liga MX comes from play offs. It's what I've been saying for the past several post.