Breakout Youth Player in MLS / USL 2026

I have a guess.

 

But at worst the third most talented team in the world.

And are they underperforming? They just finished third this World Cup and made the semis in 2018, went out in the quarterfinals to France in 2022, and made the final of the last two Euros. The main issue is they haven’t actually won one of these tournaments but in the last 8 years I’m guessing only Argentina and France have won more games at major tournaments.

 

You need a good mix in that you want foreign players who will raise the level of the league but also teams that give youth players good opportunities. There’s a balance to it.

 

Need a little more incentive for “homegrown” (unsure exactly how defined so may also need redefining) with respect to salary cap and remove homegrown territories entirely.

 

He’s salty for sure but he’s also not entirely wrong.

 

It's worth noting that homegrowns already:

• Don't count against the cap.
• Have quite a few roster spots that basically can only be used for them.
• Create more cap space when sold because they aren't netted against a transfer fee or cost despite a pretty substantial investment in the academy.

If we look at the things that could be done against the cap to make them even more attractive, there's some option:

• Playing requirements -- lots of countries have tried them. They generally don't work incredibly well, and there's probably a pretty big US Labor Law issue. The only place I'd push it is the US Open Cup. The other way, if you could get around legal, would be a minutes requirement for the year -- but not individual games.
• Make the above more beneficial; i.e., you get DOUBLE the allocation money when you sell a homegrown or something. But I'm not sure where that money comes from; the GAM from a sale comes from the transfer fee.

I think MLS already plays quite a few kids, but the bigger blocks here are actually the normal veteran bias as well as the start up investment cost and lack of certainty of payout. Having pro academies is a market solution; these are real concerns that you can alleviate on multiple ends.

Some ideas:

• Opportunity and movement on the labor side. MLS has already created the cash market, which has opened up a TON of movement. Ordaz just moved out of LA; Bombino, Vazquez to San Diego; Raines to NE. Allowing youth to move to teams that believe and then having them perform ... that's the biggest incentive.
• Creating more opportunities -- continuing and perhaps expanding on the 2-way contract situation -- maybe more of a glidepath to a full MLS contract. We need more ways for borderline players to keep getting minutes but be available for the senior team.
• Also, trying to get a better arrangement with USL teams -- until MLS really launches a real D2, you can't tell me there's not guys in the Quakes academy who couldn't make the Roots better. But they are competitors right now, and no one wants the rug pulled out from them in their league.
• Lastly, you can create more value for homegrowns by allowing the status to last longer or create a "second homegrown contract" where part of their cap hit disappears. This will reduce the inventive to sell, but if a homegrown player that stays forever, like a Jesus Ferreira, is always a 50% cap hit -- well then everyone should be developing. This will have unintended consequences, though, so maybe it's graduating.

 

The number of U21 Americans getting minutes in MLS is similar or better than the equivalents in the EPL, LA Liga, B1, Serie A, and Jupiler. Ligue 1 and the Eredivisie each have double the domestic youngsters, though.

 

I thought was only if they’re on supplementary roster not senior roster

 

Homegrown contracts don't count against the cap. But once a homegrown player gets on the second contract, that drops, IIRC.

The supplemental roster isn't really any different than the senior roster, anyway, in terms of the players playing in games. It's just that there's a limited number of sources. But it's not like they can't play more than a player on the senior roster.

It's not like an NFL practice squad, though you can treat it that way.

 

Jake Burgess writes up a great article in Backheeled using his own possession value model (which something like xthreat or G+ is at a high level) detailing his U22 MLS Best XI (minus a keeper).

https://www.backheeled.com/mls-best-young-players-world-cup-transfer-window-european-clubs/

It's pay, so I will only post the names and a small portion of the write-up. But the write-ups are great, and as usual, if you follow MLS, USL or the USMNT and don't have a backheeled sub, you are missing out.

LB Frankie Westfield

"According to Opta, he attempts the most crosses (5.44 per 90) and completes the most crosses (1.41 per 90) of any player in MLS. Among outside backs, he has also created the fourth-most big chances this season, according to FotMob."

CB Mbekezeli Mbokazi
CB Lucas Herrington
RB Édier Ocampo

CM Adri Mehmeti

"Adri Mehmeti has been one of, if not the best, central midfielders in MLS this season. His statistical output of one goal and one assist hardly tells the full story. Mehmeti’s impact extends far beyond traditional box-score numbers."

CM Paxten Aaronson

AM Niko Tsakiris

"There is a legitimate argument that Niko Tsakiris has been the best chance creator in MLS this season. With San Jose sitting atop the Western Conference, Tsakiris leads the league by creating 3.37 chances per 90 minutes."

RW Zavier Gozo

"What separates Gozo from almost every other player in MLS, and perhaps even the broader USMNT player pool, is his ability to create opportunities off the dribble. According to Opta, only Lionel Messi has produced more carries that end with a shot this season."

LW Mateo Silvetti

ST Julian Hall

"If Hall had a superpower, it would be invisibility. He constantly disappears from the defenders’ line of sight before drifting onto the blind side of center backs. By the time they realize where he’s gone, it’s often too late and the ball is already arriving at his feet near the six-yard box."

 

He is pretty wrong. Well, he is just wrong.

The problem is NOT that good American attacking prospects are not getting minutes. It IS that clubs are not developing a lot of great attacking prospects.

 

In the Dallas area the best attacking #10 types are all Mexican kids. But do they have long term potential as a pro if they aren't very athletic? Not sure what the answer to that is. We See limitations with Zendejas and Luna and they are the cream of the crop. Not a ton of Messi's undiscovered and even he had world class quickness and was also pretty fast.

 

Yeah Messi is short, but he didn’t really have any other athletic shortcomings when he was in his prime. He’s not super stocky, but he’s definitely sturdier than Pulisic. Very good to elite in terms of build, quickness, and speed.

 

20-and-under players to get starts in the attack

Current MLS season
domestics/total numbers

MLS: 25/38


25/26 European season
domestics/total numbers

EPL: 12/36
La Liga: 11/35
Serie A: 9/33
B1: 14/50
Ligue 1: 31/77
Eredivisi: 25/46
Portugal: 10/42
Belgium: 14/46

 

example: 25 American players currently 20-and-under have gotten starts in the attack this season. 38 20-and-under players of any nationality have gotten starts in the attack this season.

 

There are so many, it seems, convoluted rules in MLS for how rosters can be built and paid that it's hard to determine whether teams are developing young talent and playing them "enough" or not. My opinion is the more rules and constraints there are the harder it is for teams to develop and play younger players.
If teams see they can make money, or it makes financial sense to develop young players, they'll do it. Scouting and buying players when you are competing against the rest of the world is very expensive. Buying Argentine players definitely isn't "cheap".

 

MLS's numbers are certainly superior to those of the top European leagues--aside from Ligue 1 and Ere-- when it comes to giving the domestic youngsters starts.

 

MLS' rules encourage developing and playing young players. They also incentivize selling them, which is interesting. They are talking about loosening payroll and rules; depending on what they it could definitely decrease the incentive.

 

What I’d like to see is them eliminate the homegrown territories as I’m sure teams will take different approaches to young players and you want guys to have options to go to clubs where they’ll actually get legitimate opportunities versus higher spending clubs they may live close to where they won’t.

 

I think this is a good idea but don't think it would dramatically change things until kids are older. Doubt many families want to uproot and move because a 12 year old isn't getting enough time. By 16 I think it could happen and really players should be able to pick the best place for themselves. Having seen some already do this by choosing USL teams it doesn't always seem to be the best idea but they should be free to make both good and bad decisions.