Adams/Davies path to Major Leagues

It appears from the article that the Wipons own the Mets (losing $) and, separately, the team owns a controlling interest in the Cable network (profitable). I had the impression from your original post that the Mets had a contract which balanced out the Mets losses but it appears that you are just saying that some of the Mets non baseball business decisions are likely balancing out the baseball losses. Is this accurate?

 

Thx for the clarification

 

I think some of those players might be better. I think all the midfielders, if they could up their game, would be better. There is more time and space in midfield in MLS, than many Euro leagues.

I agree the talent now coming through is generally better. The kids now have mostly played in the DA since 12 and the DA level has been rising.

 

Contracts in Europe are generally shorter and clubs renegotiate sooner to maximize transfer value and keep squad salaries manageable.

Pulisic renegotiated his contract two or more times from when he made the first team to getting sold.

It is the length of MLS contracts combined with the cap rules that make selling Americans something most MLS teams can't make work.

 

Where would most of those players be playing. I don't see most of them playing in the top leagues. How much more time and space is there in MLS than Scandanavia, B2, Serie B, Championship etc. (Of that group, I would expect Championship to be the highest level).

Remember, guys like Tim Ream have been playing (auto starter this year at 32) for 3rd place fulham for a long time. I agree that better competition is better. I am not sure that moving from MLS to a second tier league in Europe is necessarily a significant step up that would result in a significant improvement. I can't see any of those players turning into difference makers for the USMNT (with the exception of Morris who already is doing pretty well).

 

Good point(s).

One significant issue is that young players have no real leverage. That is less true for the top talents but even they have few options unless they have a passport. If MLS offers a contract to a 15 or 16 year old he has the choice of refusing (possibly losing his position with the academy etc) or waiting til he turns 18 to try his luck in Europe.

For the players that are resigning, if they are good enough (I believe many of the new players fit this description), they now have leverage, they can take advantage of the competitive market in Europe and if they resign now they can get a contract that is favorable to them. A team like FCD that is trying to sign Cannon right now might be forced to insert a buyout clause, write the contract for a shorter time frame etc or risk losing him on a free.

 

I think it is important to always be playing at a level that challenges the player. Ideally, for maximum improvement, there will be players better than the player. As they improve to the level where they now are one of the best, it is best to move on.

With that in mind, I would say that I agree 100% with McKennie and Pulisic. Adams, due to injury is probably pretty close to where he left off in NY. I am sure that he improved some in his half season in B1, but he went over there and immediately made an impact.

Adams might have benefited from a rest before going over (I am guessing that overuse was at least a contributing factor in his injury). I know that is a technicality but it is still hard to use him as a data point.

With Reyna, I think it is at least possible that he would be at a similar level right now (assuming that he would have played a full MLS season last year vs youth soccer in Germany), but also believe the experience he will get (is getting) now is accelerating his learning curve significantly beyond what it would be in MLS.

IMO, the ideal pathway for a top young player without a passport will be (if it isn't already), to sign with MLS at a young age, play 1-2 years (maybe 3) in MLS and then move to a youth friendly European team (Dortmund is good work if you can get it). For a top prospect, I would say that would be sign at 15, begin playing in MLS around 17 and moving to Europe between the ages of 18-20...maybe 21. Of course, as USL and MLS improve and change, the ages ages and timeframes may change as well. It also matters the level of the player and which team the player is with. FCD is good, Philly good, RSL, Seattle and a few others good, many of the others....not so good.

 

Of the two, I think Cannon would benefit more from the move because he has less to gain in MLS. He is already near the top of the league as a right back and is very capable, imo of playing his postion at the B1 or EPL level. Apparently, according to one post, one of the issues he had was English work permit related. I don't know anything about interest from B1. IMO Pomykal still has a great deal of improvement to be made at FCD. He needs to be healthy for a full year, be consistently the most important player for FCD for the full year (he faded in the second half) and he needs to do the one thing he never did last year and that is produce statistically (goals and assists). If Pomykal went to Europe right now, I doubt that he would be able to play the role he plays with FCD while playing for a top team and I think that is important.

We have had players move to Europe at a young age in the past that didn't rise to near the levels of the current crop. I think it is at least partly due to the quality of the raw material. Who are the players that have begun in MLS that you believe are on the level of Pulisic, McKennie and Reyna? (I think it is early to say he is a UCL level success but am very confident that he will be.)

Put that together with the rapid change of MLS. Regardless of anyone's opinion on the level of MLS as a league and as a place for developing young talent, it is impossible (IMO) to objectively come to any other conclusion than MLS has changed dramatically in the past 5-10 years and most would say they have improved dramatically in the past 5-10 yrs in both quality of league play and as a developmental league as well.

When a league is changing as rapidly as MLS is right now, I believe that making predictions by looking back at historical trends becomes inadequate. Extrapolation is difficult enough as a predictive tool but it becomes far less reliable the more unstable the conditions.

 

To be fair the overwhelming percentage of German or Argentine prospects don't have "UCL success" either. We do have plenty of examples, though. Let's not let our inferiority complex completely get the best of us. DeMarcus Beasley started a Champions League semifinal after all. Maybe my brain is playing tricks on me, but he played for the Chicago effing Fire first.

When it comes to these youngsters, It all comes down to opportunity and the right fit. Its not rocket science. And sometimes it sure seems like a lot of luck is involved. We've sent some really good young prospects to Europe that get stuck or just disappeared.

At no point in time...……....from teens until today...………….have I heard about any official European contract or transfer offers for Reggie Cannon or Paxton Pomykal. So all of this debate and gnashing of teeth means what? Reggie Cannon was at UCLA. He could have gone wherever the hell he wanted to go.

What we can say is at the right club and the right opportunity, MLS is starting to become highly lucrative for young Americans. Jesus Ferreira and Paxton Pomykal make over $600k a year.

That's the reason that more Mexico youth prospects don't go to Europe at 18. They're paid to stay. MLS is starting to pay its young stars more to stay as well. So can MLS offer Reggie Cannon as much of a salary as the clubs that are trying to acquire him from Europe? Maybe. We'll see. I haven't heard the name of a club that's actually made an offer, so its hard to analyze.

 

Actually...………...Mexican stars are coming to MLS.
And actually #2.........…….a lot of young South American stars are coming to MLS. Why are they doing that? Why is Matias Pellegrini, a 19 year old that's represented Argentina at the U17 and U20 levels, moving to Inter Miami? Joined by BOlivian youth international Jairo Quinteros. Joined by Colombian youth international Andres Reyes. To be joined by current Mexico international Rodolfo Pizarro? Its like that at almost every MLS club. Youth internationals from around the world are coming to MLS? Why are they doing that?

Do people think all of these players all of a sudden had a deep desire to play in the Chinese Super League? No...………….China was paying them. Money makes the world go 'round.

I'm with ya that our elite youngsters should be heading over to Europe. But one can make an argument that Europe is not good for that next level down. That next level of youngster down gets thrown into the meat market and fails. Cuz in Europe they don't care about your growth. Every year they decide whether there's a better prospect available to them at your position. So most kids in Germany end up being Shaft Brewer or Zyen Jones or Isaiah Young. They're just discarded. They're not developed and they disappear. Blaine Ferri. What did Gruether Furth actually do for Blaine Ferri? I couldn't tell you. They certainly didn't appear to be committed to him long-term as a person. Now he's in USL League One, two levels below a contemporary like Thomas Roberts. Blaine Ferri was the kid who started for the US U17s. Not Thomas Roberts.

McKennie, Pulisic, Reyna, Sargent were playing first team soccer about a year after they moved to Germany. In other words, they went over already as the elite of the elite. The Bundesliga polished them, sure, but they didn't sprinkle magic fairy dust on them. We knew they were our elite prospects and they turned out to be. Its amazing how few of our next level prospects develop into anything. Most of them turn out to be USYNTer Kyle Gruno. The young defender that went over to Leicester. A few years later and he's now playing for the Treasure Coast Titans? Who are they? I couldn't tell you.

So this notion that going over to Europe is the best choice for every young prospect is farcical at best. Its the best choice for less than 1% of our prospects. The elite of the elite. One can make a very easy argument that for a player like Paxton Pomykal, MLS was indeed his best option. And maybe his only option. I never heard about contract offers from Europe. But FCD has helped him develop into a USMNTer, and is setting him up for a future move. First things first. He has to actually stay healthy, which he hasn't shown the ability to do.

 

Just a little aside, I really don't think that Davies and Adams took the same path. Davies path, imo, is more similar to Miazga's path. I think the difference is that Davies was/is a far better player and Miazga transferred at a slightly older age. I think the key similarities are that both were doing well in MLS and both transferred to top European teams that were/are not necessarily known for developing young talent (of any nationality) to their first team. Davies pure talent and the level that he came into Bayern were enough to overcome that barrier. Miazaga does not appear to have the tools that Davies had and has bounced around on loan and has faild to make any dramatic improvement that I can see.

Adams, on the other hand transferred to a far better environment for his development. There were other factors that got in the way (injuries) but he definitely seems ready to to continue where he left off if he can get past the injuries.

I really like Pomykal and Cannon but don't believe either is on the same level as Davies, so they have to be far more careful about the situation they get into and, at the same time, will probably have fewer choices. It's like getting married. Do you "settle", or do you wait for the right match?

 

Pulisic is a rare talent. He also had a Croatian passport so he could integrate to Dortmund at a younger age than most. Using him as an example is foolish. He's a very special case. I also don't think Weston is a "difference maker"-level talent. Good NT player? Yes. Special player? Not really.

Adams could be an exception too because he was in the RB system. MLS needs to allow guys to move to different leagues easier. I think you are confusing MLS/B2/Championship level guys and players who are under 21 playing in those leagues. There is a stark contrast between someone who is at that level and starting at that level.

I look at the most successful players and they all start playing first team games at a young age. I think we've seen enough of guys at big clubs who never play to dispel the "training with great players makes you great" myth.

Richards is totally different case than Mendez. Playing different positions (CBs peak later than attackers), different athletic ability, different trajectory. But I do think he needs higher minutes than B3 soon but it's not as important as Mendez.

 

I think there will be others. I also believe that MLS main contribution to the USMNT will be that 2nd tier of top prospect that may not have had a chance in the European meat grinder. Pulisic and Reyna types will and would always get the red carpet treatment. Most will have to fight it out like Dempsey did, at Fulham. Doing so can set the player back several years compared to those that get put on the fast track (imo).

If you remember, people were talking about changing Adams to an outside back because he wasn't good enough to play midfield for the USMNT just before he moved to RBL. Adams began in USL, played for NYRB because Marsch bellieved in him....didn't light it up his first year in MLS and eventually found himself as one of the consensus auto starters for the USMNT at....midfield. That is what MLS can do. Would he still make it to the same spot if he had to begin in Scandanavia? possibly, but I like the fact that we have MLS to give those that aren't necessarily on the radar a chance to succeed.

 

Agree on the first. Luke warm/not too sure on the second. How many of our players have been able to make the move from Championship/B2? I know there are a few. Morales, Wood, Berhalter, Cherundolo?, Davies (pre injury) began in Scandanavia, some moved up by promotion. Probably quite a few more that I have missed? MLS certainly doesn't have a track record at this point either but there aren't too many of our players that have started low and finished high via the lower leagues in Europe either.

The other wild card on both of your points is MLS. What will MLS look 10 years (or even 5 years) from now? That question applies to the level and to the approach to transfers.

 

On your first point, I would say it's more that the European Teams, particularly the German BL teams, are interested in the ELITE talent. The younger the better, mainly because younger players tend to be less expensive, and potentially have a better chance of a higher ROI.

As for your second point, maybe I'm missing something, but I just don't get it. European Club teams aren't interested in what's best for the USMNT. They only care about what's best for them, and will discard a player without a second thought as soon as it becomes apparent that the player doesn't fit their plans, isn't going to work out, or they bring in a more talented player in the same position.

Also, as MLS improves, the competition for places also increases. That competition day in and day out in training is where players improve the most. Will young Americans have to fight harder to earn playing time? Yes. What is wrong with that? Isn't that one of the main reasons some fans and pundits want young American players to go abroad in the first place?

There are some in these circles who want most of the young Americans to go overseas to play because in their view MLS is a weak league. Some of those same people will then complain that MLS is bringing in too much talent from outside America that is then taking away playing time from young Americans. MLS is not going to improve unless better players are brought in. Young American and American players in general aren't going to improve unless they play against better competition. In other words, a continually improving MLS will lead to better American players.

I'm in now way saying that MLS is on par with the top leagues in the world (PL, Bundi, Ligue 1, La Liga). At the same time, there are fans who are unable to see or just flat refuse to recognize that the domestic league is vastly improved compared to where it was just 5 years ago. Full disclosure, I've been a Union season ticket holder since day one, so 10 years. Comparing games from 2010 to 2019, Geo Tracker to a Fully loaded Ford Explorer. MLS has a ways to go, but there are folks who still believe the league is at 2010 levels of quality and that's just not the case.

How exactly would the USSF be able to change/influence international law? Is this a good use of resources that could potentially be better spent elsewhere?

 

To further your point, the expansion of USL so that there are now two sequential professional leagues below MLS and the number of teams is growing rapidly is critical. Ideally, the players that can't quite make an improving MLS will be able to play in USL and move up from there. If you look at the number of players in MLS now, compared to 10-15-20 years ago, they probably aren't too different (don't have numbers in front of me) and the percentages have gone down with MLS expansion. What has improved greatly is the quality of MLS and the numbers of players now (mostly in the past few years) playing professionally (MLS, USL Championship, USL League 1). So, we now have approximately equal numbers playing MLS but at a higher level than it was and we have far more young players playing at a level that wasn't available to that age group a few years ago...it was college soccer.