The seasonal standings say otherwise in the current and past years. Heck Monterrey who was just competing at CWC a few months ago didn't even qualify for the Liguilla this clausura.
You just proving my point, my guy. I don't even know what you are trying to argue or prove when you are saying the same thing I said. You don't need forced parity and salary caps (which Liga MX doesn't have) to create what you just described. It just happens. We see it in Liga MX and Liga Argentina. I guess no one was reading what I was explaining several post back.
"Parity" amongst MLS fans for some reason think the salary cap rules is what creates this randomness and what makes MLS a one of a kind league in the world. They think that that is why "anyone in MLS can beat anyone". Not to target anyone but all over social media it's what MLS fans think MLS "parity" creates. It's why they always bring up that they "don't want to be like the Bundesliga where one team wins all the time" as if MLS and Bundesliga have the same league season format. They don't. Liga MX and Liga Argentina are more similar to MLS, not the Bundesliga. The Brasileirao is similar in format to the Bundesliga and even they don't have one team win every single year but that's another subject. I have given examples of Liga MX and Liga Argentina that the same thing happens as they do in MLS and they don't have "parity" or salary caps. The randomness comes from the play offs. It doesn't matter if Monterrey outspends everyone in Liga MX there will be times where they don't qualify to their play offs just like it happened this season. Or it doesn't matter that Boca Jrs is one of the two top spenders in Argentina, there will be times where they'll be eliminated right away in their play offs just as it happened this season. And both teams will go years without winning their league while outspending almost everyone and teams that spend less will win. As you can see this isn't exclusively for MLS as most MLS fans think it is because of the MLS rules.
STR1 thinks the issue is winning MLS Cup, specifically. I think the issue is winning games. Parity isn’t the goal, it’s the means. The goal is for every franchise to have hopeful fans. The goal is for no fanbase to be perpetual doormats. The goal is for every fanbase to have proof of concept that their team can be a winning team.
So...in Liga MX and Liga Argentina winning games isn't possible for the non-top teams because parity and salary caps don't exist? Anyone can beat anyone only happens in MLS because of the "parity"? Literally just said that Platense, a team in Argentina, won its FIRST EVER league title in its 100+ years of existence thanks to the play off format they added recently. And they don't have salary caps or any type of parity. Pretty sure they got to the final by WINNING GAMES. But here you are trying to say that only in MLS everyone has a chance at winning because of its rules.
"The goal is for every franchise to have hopeful fans." That’s what you said and not to target you specifically but majority of MLS fans think this is what makes MLS special. That only in MLS "anyone can beat anyone and anyone can be Champions". MLS isn't the only league where fans of every team is hopeful, as per what you said, of winning some games. I've being mentioning 2 leagues that even have similar formats to MLS that also has what MLS fans think makes MLS "unique".
LMX has a lot of its revenue coming from national TV contracts, which to my understanding share the revenue pretty well. This creates more parity than you'd see in a typical European league, if maybe less than MLS. It is true that playoffs matter (two things can be true). Regular season titles are more straightforwardly bought. For one thing, they can stimulate rich teams to pay for 'insurance policies' where playoffs incentivize spending more on the starters and top subs you know will play come big game time. There's not so much reason to spend on guy #18.
Each club in Liga MX negotiates its own TV contract. It isn't centralized like MLS and it isn't shared either.
Oh, that appears to be correct (and something they're looking at changing with the new club takeover).
Yes, LigaMX has been working closely with EPL to model their TV deals. Unfortunately, owners that own Two of the largest National TV channels makes it extremely hard to make this achievable. Many scoffed at Chivas for breaking away from Televisa but they made it work even when it was rocky at times. ChivasTV found a lane and is now streamed via Amazon Prime MX.
But that's the American way. You may wish that MLS was run like every other league but it's in the US and there are 4 other very successful major leagues that MLS owners look to. American investors are looking at Europe because clubs have traditionally been run by hobbyists and the Kroenke's, FSG and Textors of this world believe that they can make a ton of money if they make them more like NFL.
Mexican owners appear to want LMX to look like MLS. They want to control costs while increasing the value of their holdings. It's no coincidence that since they got rid of pro/rel America and Chivas have popped in the top 50 clubs by valuation.
Not to mention that a good portion of the owners in MLS also own teams in one or more of those 4 American Leagues. American investors aren't investing in European/foreign Clubs solely because of Pro/Rel either. The main reason they are investing is because they see distressed or neglected assets that they can eventually flip for huge profits. Football is the number 1 professional sport in the majority of the world, which makes investing in these clubs much easier (there's already a customer base). Promotion/Relegation of course contributes to the low entry costs for these American and other foreign investors. If it was simply because of Pro/Rel, they'd all be flooding USL with teams in preparation for 2028.
Just in MLS: Kroenke: NFL, NHL, NBA Haslam: NFL Kraft: NFL Hunt: NFL Wylff: NFL Magic (LAFC): WNBA, MLB RSL's: NBA Tepper: NFL Blank: NFL MLSE: NHL, NBA, CFL AEG: NHL Fisher: MLB Leonsis: NBA, NHL Gruber(LAFC): NBA, MLB
No one was talking about ProRel. If "winning games" is the goal, not so much the cup, so every fan base thinks they have a chance as it was said above then I guess MLS is on the right path. But...this same thing happens in Liga MX and Liga Argentina. Maybe some of you think America runs rampant in Liga MX and only loses 2 games in a calendar year and that River and Boca in Argentina do the same because those leagues don't have "parity". That doesn't happen. It never has. It works in those leagues because the talent pool is very limited. The talent pool in soccer is world wide. You can even find talent in second divisions of your own country or of other countries. You can even develop your own talent unlike the NFL. That's why the NFL has so many restrictions, rules and a strict salary cap because of the limited talent pool. It works out perfectly for NFL, no one will dispute that. Yes, Mexican owners want to copy MLS...in some ways. Not in everything. They won't add salary caps. They won't get a centralized TV deals nor one jersey sponsor for everyone either. Nor have shared revenues. The simple fact being that you have clubs like Chivas and America, which are very popular on 2 countries, and can do financially better on their own instead of being held back and will have to share with slackers or non-popular clubs. So yes, in some ways Liga MX is definitely copying MLS but not everything MLS does is beneficial.
I heard once that EPL currently shares equally, but I'm not sure if that's really true. A few years back I remember their business chair saying it was based on TV appearances, but since they spread those around a lot too, the ratio of biggest payout to smallest was only 1.6:1. That's still a lot better than most leagues at sharing the wealth, which is why Team 15 etc have way deeper pockets than their continental counterparts.
these two sentences seem to contradict each other. I disagree that that’s why. My opinion is that the NFL has those rules to ensure parity.
I said parity in NFL works because the talent pool is very limited while in soccer it is world wide. You can disagree all you want but that’s just a fact.
No, you didn’t. Anyone can read what you wrote. The words are right there. It’s a weird thing to lie about.
The NFL has a salary cap to ensure that the owners keep as much of the revenues that the players generate as the players collectively will allow them. Parity may be a byproduct of that (looking at the New England and KC dynasties you could argue it isn’t), but the salary cap has way more to do with suppressing players salaries than with parity. In the NFL and NBA it’s practically cliche for players to restructure their contracts so winning teams can sign free agents or for veteran free agents to take a pay cut to sign with a contender.
When the minimum salary is $880k to $1.3M NFL players can't complain too much about having their salaries suppressed. The CBA actually protects the lowest paid players. If there was a free for all the bench warmers would be the ones that lose out. MLS is one of the few soccer leagues to have a minimum salary. There are 17 year-old MLS players making more than veteran players in Belgium and Mexico.