I'm just saying there's money out there if we raise the salary cap. I have said in the past there's a right way to raise the cap, but bringing home American players for a World Cup year is a good rationale to drastically inject large amounts of money into the player pool. This could be a possibility; however, I think you have to find a way to provide existing tangible benefits and not just the promise of what could be, if that makes any sense. The fact that the USA struggles with consistency on big stages (e.g., WC 2002 proceeded by WC 2006) makes that a very risky expectation/hope. Of course it could work - we've seen Americans are willing to pay good money for great soccer when the European teams tour the States over the summer. Some of them are not. And you politely ignored the other sentence preceding it. Americans abroad have typically not performed so much better than our domestic talent to the point of saying the European game is more beneficial to the national team. Our starting line-up and our bench are composed almost entirely of players abroad. So where are all of these equivalent US-based players? So Blanco and Angel haven't been good for the American game? Those are players past their prime, what about players who are in their prime or coming into the prime, and more of them? That's not a "small pool of players" if you ask me. Being "good for the American game" does not mean improving the overall play of the league. The number of players abroad for the USA is not large. Furthermore, I don't think there are many European-level players in their 'prime' who are not already in Europe. There are not a lot of players like Ljungberg and Blanco in the MLS right now. Even with Beckham, LA had their problems. You need a pretty decent infusion of high-quality players around the league to convince other players it's worth making the move to the USA. Spector couldn't have developed those skills in the States? To say that he couldn't implies that all Americans must go overseas, but you have just implied they're not good enough to go to Europe. So which one is it? Spector (like most of our players abroad) is an exception to the average American soccer player - he was evaluated at a young age to have enough talent to warrant a contract at Man U. At that age most players are picked up on potential, not fine-tuned skill. There (and since he's been in the EPL) he learned much that he uses today. Is the average player in the MLS of the talent of Spector? Probably not. My suggestion is that the best of the best from the USA - given our current youth development scheme - will probably benefit the most going abroad young because everything there now (training, player pools, leagues, etc) is superior. So which would be better for a player? Training/playing in Europe or training/playing in the US with players not good enough (for the most part) to play in Europe? The MLS will improve when the USA can provide better development opportunities here for players good enough to go play Europe. Until that time, those guys will continue to go abroad.
This thread is beyond ridiculous. It will NEVER happen, and there is no need to. The majority of the main contributors in the Confederations Cup this summer against the best teams were the guys that play in Europe. Only Donovan and Clark were MLS guys who stood out, and both are ready to leave this winter to test themselves at a higher level.
I would hope that if many guys came back it would raise the MLS level. And if the thread is ridiculous, there is no reason for you, a wise man, to be here. ;-)
I've got an even more radical idea. Buy a CCC level team in England, Spain, Italy, or France and populate it with our senior team, the U20's could initially make up the reserves and the U17s and younger could poplulate the acadamy. The eurosnobs who prefer their players in europe and folks who prefer playing time almost anywhere to bench riding in top leagues would all be satisfied. Now everybody's happy.
Unfortunately the ones that came home were past their sell date, injured, not playing or were on the outs with their teams, and most if not all were making less or similiar money than what MLS offered. They were also guaranteed stars/focal points here. Easy to come home under those circumstances. Wouldn't you say?
I've always thought that MLS teams should be allowed an auto DP type designation, above what they have now, for Nat players, if a team wanted to pay those players. Even if you capped it at 600K or so it could bring back a few of the better players. I don't disagree with bringing our mid level guys back, just gotta find a way how, which is hard in our environment. Also, let's face it, you probably couldn't drag DMB or EJ away from their current paychecks (I know you wouldn't be able to drag me away), knowing that they aren't worth DP money here in MLS right now. Hard to bring a player back for a few hundred K. Who in their right mind would come close to paying them what they make now? A fools errand to say the least, and a way to get fired. It would probably cause more problems in the ranks as I sure as hell would want more if they were earning DP money. Isn't as cut and dry as it seems.
we seem to struggle with youth development. we develop "future stars" here and they go to europe where they aren't as good as they thought they were. what we should do is develop a system where we can "outsource" the youth development of american players to european or even south american academies who have the better players and coaching. everyone loves to look at the 2002 WC team, look at some of their key players, reyna, kirovski, o'brien, all spent significant youth time (pre 18 years old) in europe. if mls is truelly serious about developing american players, they should get out of having their youth squads compete with academy and super y league teams and more into scouting american talent to be developed overseas. i envision it like this: mls team partners with 1 or 2 european clubs to scout north american players. the mls teams should work out a transfer system that would allow the european club to buy the most talented players rights at a reduced fee in return for training a large portion of american youth players that would ultimately mostly come back to mls in their primes. for european teams they get help identifying the most talented north american players and can also get involved at an earlier age with their development. for mls teams, their youths get significant advanced training with the world's best before returning to the states (or continuing in europe) to play. the concept is simple on paper but would take years to put into place. i know that there have been things kind of like this arranged (rapids and arsenal?) but it should happen on a wider scale.
What the hell???? Kirovski wasn't on that team. And Reyna spent 4 years playing college ball at UVA. The only 1 of those 3 you're right about is O'Brien.
Tab may not have been past his age prime, but the injuries were already a problem. Waldo was stuck on the bench and pretty much done over there. Only lower division teams were stepping up if I recall (could be worng on that - I know Mex teams liked him). Chubby Tony is the one I give you. Way over rated and over publicized compared to actual ability, MLS helped make him a very good/well rounded keeper. Other than that...what do we really have. An exposed/cooked Lalas? A mediocre Burns? A done Klopas? The two years after 94 were not very kind to our Nat boys overall. You named one exception. I'll give you Waldo, but he was done, and he get paid the same here, so no biggie for him to "sacrifice" for the new league. Very few came back, if any, for a pay cut, for the greater good Bruce.
I believe the MLS has suffered over the past few years because talent drain and talent dilution. The players that have left MLS for Scandinavia and other lower leagues in Europe for higher pay has caused a talent drain. The talent drain in not being filled fast enough by younger players. Talent dilution is caused by expansion teams and will not end for a few more years. I would like for the league to do something to prevent this. Whether it is increasing the salary cap or come up with a designated player rule that is designed to keep US and Canadian players in the league. If you were to add players such as Goodson, Perkins, Tracy, Feilhaber, White, Califf, Robles,Parkhurst, Kazlauskas, Hill, Grella and others. Then MLS would not be a bad place for someone like Adu, Beasley, or Gooch to come back to find their feet again. It would be foolish say that Dempsey, Boca, or Donovan would be better in MLS.
how is it Darwins theory of survival of the fittest not weeded you out yet? either way I will finally put you on the ignore list, the big soccer equivalent...
I think I got ya, I guess my point is - Do many of these guys deserve anything close to what they are getting paid now in Europe? Different world and payscale back then. How can anyone justify paying DMB or EJ what they make now? You just can't with any type of rationale thinking. Impossible to. No one would...anywhere. Who is gonn apick up th ewelfare bill fo rthese two and why? A young player with potential is one thing. Guys like that... ...I doubt either will ever be a major player in MLS again from a production standpoint. The guys in 96 came back and really didn't hurt themselves money wise, and they were worth it for th eleague then. Can you say the same thing for an EJ or DMB now with a straight face? Different situations completely from 96 to now. Different variables.
most of the players who choose the scandi leagues are in it for the increase in pay and the fact you are that much closer to europe a jump in salary would certainly improve the game here as we could hold onto players. Despite the fact Rolfe was offered a hefty raise, he could still earn more in europe, and now he's off at the end of the season... the cap will increase, but not as drastic as some might expect. the good news is that they are hitting up ideas like Inc. cap, Inc. min. paid, add a cap-free DP and other things... personally i suspect we'd find more talent in the league if we brought back the reserves league and ditched the academy rules... allowing teams to flood their youth teams and academy with money to develop players and having a reserves league to pull them through would DRASTICALLY improve our depth in talent
It all boils down to youth development. Maybe we should send all our 3rd graders to Europe for 10 years instead. MLS can take all the action they want to keep the best US & Canadian talent in the league, but the bottom line is there's still not enough talent. Brazil and Argentina's best players leave for Europe, but they fill the voids with quality young players. These players, by the time they're 19 or 20 may have 1, 2, or 3 years of professional experience. They're ready to win U-20 WC's, move on to Europe, or start getting call ups to the full national sides. We don't have that talent pipeline.
Great post. Yes, to me it's not so much that some of our best players are riding the pine in some of the top leagues in the world, it's that MLS can't even compete monetarily with lower leagues in Europe like Belgium, Norway, Sweden and Denmark. We can't just wave a magic wand though, and suddenly make money appear. And removing the salary cap completely or instantly for domestic players would ruin the parity of the league- something that MLS wants to avoid completely. So incremental changes appear to be the way to go. The other thing that really bothers me is that MLS appears to be failing in their mandate to develop domestic players. Foreign players are all well and good, but ultimately American and Canadian fans want to see American and Canadian stars. MLS needs to realize this. Some MLS teams are investing resources in youth academies, but none approach the scale of teams in Europe or South America. One reason is there is little incentive to do so. You could change that very quickly by saying that all the future salaries of MLS-developed domestic (and only domestic!) players would be forever exempt from any sort of MLS salary cap. This would apply to new players only- you could not make it retroactive. To make it fair, you would also have to ban any sort of monetary participation/partnerships with foreign clubs. You would also need to insure that any such team would retain a healthy portion of profits from any future sales of the player they developed. This would certainly be a radical change in the playing field, but it would at least give MLS teams the time to prepare. Those teams that take advantage will succeed, those who don't will eventually find themselves less competitive. At the other end of the spectrum, you could grant each team a domestic DP- whose salary would be completely immune to the cap. They could then choose to use it on a new player, or designate it on a current one. But if they choose the latter, you would have to put a rule in there that would require any money recovered under the cap to be use on domestic players only. You would also have to take steps to prevent foreign nationals from using such a spot by becoming an American citizen. Though the US doesn't, most foreign countries acknowledge dual citizenship, so the foreign national gives up nothing, and that's not fair. A citizenship for ten years minimum rule would take care of that. If the new domestic DP rule works, add more spots over time. In a generation or so, if a salary cap even exists, I'd like to see it apply to foreign players only.
The money. The US could afford to not do well in the World Cup-we have survived it before! The US can not afford to have its professional soccer league fold again a la NASL. Spending lots of money could only come through borrowing lots of money which is bad business. In the past, we have brought back lots of European based players--to little avail. Granted, most of these were past their sell by date--the singular exception being Landon. Consider how far we have come. Name any other World Cup qualifying cycle in the history of the US where a player playing in the EPL as a sub was not even called up all season long (Eddie Johnson)? The fact that we left EJ and Beasley out of the last several months of playing and no one complained indicates our depth has improved. The MLS is crucial to our success. Here are the main things it needs to do: 1. Stay profitable - without this, all is lost. As long as it makes money, it will exist 2. Stay profitable - just in case I did not emphasize this enough 3. Get a bit better each season through organic improvement in play versus big spending on ageing rock stars. 4. Sell its young players to European teams. If young players, especially in CONCACAF, see the MLS has a stepping stone to bigger things, it will attract more talent. This will also improve #1 and #2. The players don't have to be American for this to work. Football is a game of risks. Best to manage risk by spreading the eggs out amongst multiple baskets, rather than them all being in the same one. There is no universal right answer to the question of whether one should stay in the relative safety of MLS or venture to Europe and risk no playing time. Landon has thrived state side. Dempsey has thrived in the EPL. Adu has suffered.
i wouldnt want all of them to come back, just the ones that arent playing in big leagues or getting playing time.