1. Brasil 2. Argentina 3. MLS I think that the MLS game is alot like central american leagues because the MLS gets alot of Central American players so the style is the same, but quality is better.
Brazil and Argentina are in the CONMEBOL, not CONCACAF. As for CONCACAF, it'd be... 1. Mexico 2. MLS 3. Costa Rica 4. Guatemala 5. Honduras 6. El Salvador 7. Jamaica 8. Trinidad & Tobago 9. Panama 10. Belize If you want the Western Hemisphere, CONCACAF and CONMEBOL... 1. Brazil 2. Argentina 3. Mexico 4. MLS 5. Colombia 6. Uruguay
i would like to say mls is better than the central american teams, but constant bad results in the concacaf champions Cup makes me think differently. mls is good but the central american leagues have a faster pace still.
Then you should look at the results of the champions cup competition. MLS sides usually beat Central American sides. It's MFL sides that seem to give them a good flogging. The MFL is one of the top 10 leagues in the world. MLS is not.
Granted, there are a few good, even quite good, Central American clubs, but the overall quality in MLS is superior. That would be my argument for the MLS over Colombia, Uruguay and Colo Colo. Though, granted I don't follow the Copa Libertadores closely, much less the respective leagues / teams.
I agree that MLS is one of the better leagues in the western hemisphere.. but I wouldnt put them ahead of the Colombian and Chilean leagues. Even with all the financial problems the Chilean league faces.. they still have good players and have 3-4 teams that are capable of competing at the international level. Aside from the 2 concacaf titles and interamericana which were all played on US soil... MLS teams cant compete in Mexico and South America. MLs clubs still have a hard time winning in Central America, but sometimes do mange points in Central America. Lets not forget the MercoNorte Cup. MLS clubs didnt do to well against the colombian teams. Best leagues 1. Brazil 2. Mexico/Argentina 4. Colombia 5. Chile 6. Uruguay 7. Paraguay/MLS 9. Peru 10. Ecuador 11. Bolivia 12. Costa Rica 13. Venezuela 14. Guatemala 15. Honduras 16. El Salvador 17. Jamaica 18. Trinidad & Tobago 19. Panama 20. Belize
MLS is more balanced thus they can compete with those leagues like Uruguay and Paraguay, which have two or three good teams only. I don't think they are at the level of Nacional, Olimpia and Peñarol but better than other of thier clubs.
Well, for arguement's sake, the MLS gets screwed in games played outside the States. Check the FC Champions Cup matches. What a joke. No doubt they could've been deserved, but 6 red cards and 5 penalty kicks in the five away games all against the US? I don't remember the games against the Mexican sides, but I do remember a PK and a card, as well. Feel free to correct me on these numbers. Point is, the MLS gets the short end of the stick by referees outside of the States, despite playing style differences. I think as far as talent pool goes, MLS is superior to Colombia or Uruguay, or on par with. However, thanks to single-entity parity and such, I'd give Medelin or Nacional or Penarol the nod over the Galaxy or Metros. Maybe.
Well, for arguement's sake, the MLS gets screwed in games played outside the States. Check the FC Champions Cup matches. What a joke. No doubt they could've been deserved, but 6 red cards and 5 penalty kicks in the five away games all against the US? I don't remember the games against the Mexican sides, but I do remember a PK and a card, as well. Feel free to correct me on these numbers. Point is, the MLS gets the short end of the stick by referees outside of the States, despite playing style differences. Part of that has to do with the MLS officiating. MLS refs are so incompetent and dont know how to apply the rules correctly. As a result, MLS players get used to the hard play and get away with abusive behavior towards the ref. Go down to Mexico or South America... you will get carded if you look at a ref funny. There is a difference between being an intense player and being a physical player. So, its not that they are getting screwed... its that they have not adapted the officiating. I see it on TV.. you can read thier lips and use the F word. Try that over there and you will get thrown out or booked. I think as far as talent pool goes, MLS is superior to Colombia or Uruguay, or on par with. I dont want to go too far back in history because Uruguay (both at the national and league level) is not the same team of the 30s, 40, and 50s, but thier league is very competetive and is able to compete at the international level. Since 95, 3 different colombian sides have gone to the finals of the Copa Libertadores (America de Cali, Deportivo de Cali, & Atl. Nacional.) In 2000, Atl. Junior qualified to the second round. With America de Cali, Deportivo Cali, Atl. Nacional, Atl. Junior doing fairly weel in the Copa Libertadores... that basically indicates that it is not a 1-2 team league. This year, DIM is also doing well. I know that MLS clubs dont participate in the Copa libertadores... but its alot better than hte CCC and alot better than the MercoNorte. MLS clubs didnt do too well against the colombian teams or in the Merconorte in gerneral. SO how are you basing this???
If you don't follow the leagues closely how do you come to the conclusion that MLS has a deeper talent pool then Colombia? Let's see DIM is in the querfinals of the Libertadores with a real good shot at the semi finals. Do you think the Galaxy or Metrostars could be in the same place?
Yes, I do think the Metros and Galaxy could compete. I'm not quite sure how a league's history directly correlates to current competition level, but in the event that it might, the MLS would be a joke. However, professional soccer has existed Stateside since before the turn of the 20th century, much the same as the South American leagues. The US Open Cup is one of the longest continuous club tournaments worldwide. MLS teams have competed in the MercaNorte only once or twice. Judging by those few representations, yes, they couldn't compete. However, teams from every country flop in the Libertadores and other cups. Simply because MLS teams didn't do well in their limited appearances doesn't necessarily mean the league is crap. When was the last time an MLS team competed in the MercaNorte? 1999? DC United? Anyone know? I honestly don't remember. Point is, say it was 1999, 4 years ago. The MLS is 8 years old... We're growing and improving. Alot has changed in 4 years. Roy Lassiter can't make it and Valderrama finally retired. I think its a shame at least an MLS club isn't given the chance to, say, qualify for the Libertadores. But, its something I think the MLS will have to earn. The only way to do that will be by declaring regional strength in the FC Champions Cup, which by all accounts, is a very poorly run competetion. I will in no way defend the MLS referees or the players and their crap dissent. I understand your arguement, and it makes good sense. To an extent. An average of a red card and a penalty kick against an MLS side per away game seems a tad extreme. (Check New England v Arabe Unido) Okay, back to the MetroStars competing in something like the Libertadores. First off, who is DIM? It'd be hard to say whether an MLS side can make the Semis. Probably not the first time around. The styles of play they'd be exposed to would cause the teams to have to learn to adjust, and consequently I wouldn't expect them to clean up. However, there's no doubt the MLS clubs will very well be able to adjust and adapt, grow and learn to compete at the level of the Brazilian, Argentine and Mexican clubs if they are in competetion against them. Well, lets look at the Galaxy. They've been to the MLS finals 3 times, won the title once. They've won the Supporters' Shield, US Open Cup and FC Champions Cup all in recent history. Subsequently, they were to particiapate in the World Club Championship alongside the likes of Real Madrid. As a consolation to that tourney's cancellation, they are competing this summer in the World Peace King Cup against PSV Eindhoven, AS Roma, Bayer Leverkusen and Sao Paolo, among others. The team boats strong talent, starting with Guatemalan Carlos Ruiz to the unforgetable Cobi Jones, as well as Cienfuegos and up-and-comping American youngsters Danny Califf and Memo Gonzalez. Many, if not the majority, are ins on their respective National sides, or at least have experience on the National level. They don't suck. The MetroStars have Clint Mathis, a man who can say his club always wins when he scores. Also, Eddie Pope, the mainstay of the US National Team's defense. Both produced on the world stage and are players of great quality. As a side note, Carlos Bianchi, Boca Jrs. manager, stated that Pope has the ability to play on ANY Argentine side. Tim Howard. The best goalkeeper in the MLS and the heir to EPL Keeper of the Year, Brad Friedel, an MLS by-product. Howard is currently being pursued by Manchester United. Next, Honduran national team captain and creative spark, Amado Guevara, Jamaican national Craig Ziadie and Bolivian striker Jamie Moreno. Not to forget, MLS winningest coach Bob Bradley. Also to be remembered is the Columbus Crew's Brian McBride and his success earlier this year at Everton. <Insert statement about Donovan's abilities> <...and how sweet Freddy Adu's gonna be> The talent and potential is there. My point? MLS sides are talented and have strong abilities that vastly have contributed to the success of our national team. Granted, the MLS is young and may not be up to the standard of such mature leagues. But by playing and competing at their level, in their competetions, I think the MLS will only grow and improve beyond its already impressive level for its age, eventually surpassing the likes of Colombia and Uruguay, and even Mexico, as the US has done on the national level.
MLS played in the 2001 Copa Merconorte Metrostars and Wizards. DIM= Derportivo Independiente Medellín (Check New England v Arabe Unido) I thought New England played LD Alajuelense. How many games have the Galaxy won this year?
Ah, my bad. Columbus played Unido. Fine, check the New England v LD Alajuelense series. How did the Metros and Wizards get in? The Metros were terrible in 2001 and the Wizards were nothing special, despite their 2000 MLS Cup. How many games have the Galaxy played at home?
If the Galaxy were such a strong team you would think that they could at least win one game on the road. Have they played Colorado in Colorado yet?
Columbus and the Galaxy got spanked by MFL teams and I don't think their is a Colombian team that would get spanked by them. You say about that Colombian teams have int. experience and MLS team don't. Well then get some. Until then the Colombian League is better than MLS.
Who claimed they'd win in Mexico? They haven't and, as much has been seen, can't. They lost both games on the road of the FC Champions Cup. They also picked up red cards and a couple of penalty kicks in those games. However, the Copa Libertadores is much more respectable competetion than the CONCACAF Champions Cup. I would expect the refereeing to correlate with the prestigiousness of the tournament. Still, in its 8 years of existence, an MLS club has won the CONCACAF Champions Cup twice, as well as a Inter-American Cup. For a young league, lacking the "tradition" and "culture" of your beloved leagues, such is commendable.
And those wins came from modified tournaments played entirely in US soil. The point some of us are trying to make is that MLS teams are too young and week to make it in the international circuit and there are no basis for comparison to South American leagues.
Damn, you're right. Call up LA. Tell them to drop out of the World Peace Cup. Screw it. We might as well let Mexico win a game against our MLS-based national team every now and then. They're obviously far superior. What, with all that winning they do... On a side not, Kansas City got royally screwed in their MercaNorte Cup apperance by Mexican refs in Mexico.
those champions cup losses are in the middle of the mexican season, with their teams in form, while the MLS hasn't even started yet. That accounts for some of the poor performances