That's interesting... because the main reason many foreign players - especially ex-MFL players - struggle in MLS is the pace of play. MLS is one of the fastest leagues in the Americas. MFL is one of the slowest. Any accusation of slow pace leveled at MLS can be leveled at just about any league outside England and Scandinavia, and can be leveled ten times over at the MFL.
I agree the pace of MFL is generally slower than MLS from what I have been able to see. However, as I see the MFL games, they are mostly played in the sunshine, which means the conditions are hot and humid. So I have a question, how much of the slower play, (assuming the game is slower) is related to the fact that the weather conditions dictate the slower pace? Even a very fit player cannot often stand the heat and humidity. Not to make an excuse for the pace; I found the Mexican pace to be slow in the Italy and US games at WC as well. Consequently, my assumption is it is a national preference of many Mexican players that the pace be somewhat slower. Right? Or wrong?
i would like to congratulate the persons who posted, both MLS and MFL fans for having what i believe the first ever thread that did not become a troll war!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
comparing mexican and MLS leagues And to take my prior post in a slightly different direction; How much of the speed game that Elninho mentions exists in England and Scandinavia is related to the fact that conditions there are far cooler, on average, than those in Mexico? Cultural conditions are always geographically influenced and geography, and the resultant weather differences, play a part in the national makeup of the way the game of soccer is played, IMHO. You can run harder longer when the weather cooperates. When it doesn't, you have to slow down. Not that this is all of it but I submit it is a significant factor in the pace of the 2 leagues in discussion.
MLS MFL Merger In the Works? Would a merger between these two leagues, be good for both, either, neither?
A merger would be stupid. Stinky's post is hysterical! The Mexican league has twice as many teams and I believe attracts more and better foreign players. But it is god awful to watch.
Here is a thread listing all the foreigners in MFL with plenty of commentary. Apparently, most of these guys play for their national teams except for the Brazilians and Argentines. I guess many of the foreigners in MLS play for their national teams too, but there are far less of them and many are from smaller countries. https://www.bigsoccer.com/forum/showthread.php?threadid=4236&perpage=15&pagenumber=1 As for domestic players, I think we all know that the US natl team is better than Mexico's. But the difference is marginal (though me thinks in 10-20 years we will be miles ahead of Mexico in terms of domestic talent). The fact that 1/2 the top US players are in Europe compensates for the fact that Mexico's top players are spread out over more teams in MFL. But overall, the talent level in MFL must get the edge b/c of the substantial higher quality of foreigners.
Gosh stinky, you seem to be the only one not to realize that foreigners actually do play in Mexico (FMF) and US (MLS). Cardoso plays in Toluca, BUT he is from Paraguay, and Carlos Ruiz plays for LA, but he is from Guatemala. What do they care about your quote above? Now to the broad topic. What exactly do you want to compare? Attendance? FMF by a landslide Revenue? Again FMF Coverage ? FMF (Hell, I've seen in depth coverage of the FMF here!!) International exp? FMF You see, it's not really fair to compare the two. One is an established league while the other is coming into its own. Respect them both for what they bring.
If World Cup victorys determine who has better Leagues then i guess the K-League is superior to Serie A. Fiorentina wouldnt stand a chance in Korea
Imagine Texas heat plus altitude much higher than Denver, throw in the midday sun and mostly very large fields, and you have a recipe for slow play. That's Liga Mexicana for you--though why they insist on playing most of their games in the midday heat is a mystery to me. If you watch Atlas play at night, though, it almost looks like a real, full-speed game. The reason some of my Mexican friends have explained the obsession with the LMF is that skilled players are given time on the ball and acres of space because of the conditions--everyone learns to be cautious about conserving energy, there aren't the kind of double-teams all the time you get in MLS, and little tricks that take time wind up working. What I think is abominable is Mexican League goalkeeping. Except for maybe three or four keepers in the league, the guy between the pipes is almost never as good at stopping shots as his teammates are at taking them. Seriously, a Joe Cannon or a Nick Rimando or a Zach Thornton or a Tony Meola or a Tim Howard could easily start for three-quarters of the teams in the league. It's interesting that the discussion shifted to national teams, because many people believe that the quality South American imports that make the LMF so good also hurt the national team. Most LMF teams have creative central playmakers--most of them aren't Mexican. And look at Chivas in recent years with its all-Mexican lineup. Not doing too well. I prefer MLS because of the better parity. Could an average MLS team beat Club America with its moneyed roster? Probably not. Could they beat Veracruz, San Luis, Tigres, Puebla, Tecos or Celaya? Absolutely.
umm...err.... of course i realze that, i realize it very much....just like i realize a soccer game is over when the ref blows the final whistle, and the team with more goals wins, and if its some type of tournament, the team that wins advances and the losing team goes home....to mexico.... like when the US beat Mexico in Jeonju in the Round of 16 Match at the WC Finals in Jeonju, Korea, on goals by McBride and Donovan.... effectively putting a chainsaw to El Tree. ummm....errrr.... USA 2 Mexico 0
Re: MLS MFL Merger In the Works? Column C). Against FIFA rules, and a terrible way to popularize MLS among Americans other than Mexican-Americans, as well as a good way to alienate Mexican and Mexican-American fans of MFL. Attendance would go up at MLS stadiums, though.
It's my understanding that many (all?) of the mexican teams have big corporate owners, not simply sponsors, that are willing to shell out lots of cash on the clubs. That's how they're able to land guys like bam-bam and one big reason why a lot of Mexicans don't venture overseas . So I wouldn't assume that these clubs are making money since the line between running a club as a business and running a club for advertising and corporate image is much more blurred.
Imagine Texas heat plus altitude much higher than Denver, throw in the midday sun and mostly very large fields, and you have a recipe for slow play. The heat near or around the state of Mexico is very different from that of Texas. The altitude is relativlely high... But someone who has lived in that region for many years (like me) can tell you that it does get cold. From late june to Early August, the heat is rough during noon, but it starts to go gown around 2-4. The beautiful thing about the climate of that region is that you get the four seasons. Even during the summer time..it is common to wear a light sweater at nights near or around the state of Mexico. That's Liga Mexicana for you--though why they insist on playing most of their games in the midday heat is a mystery to me. I dont mind it. If you watch Atlas play at night, though, it almost looks like a real, full-speed game. And if you watch Toluca play, their games are a lot faster....and they play in the thier games around 3pm. Sometimes, they have played thier games at noon.. and the game is still very fast. Toluca is also at a higher altitude than Mexico City or Guadalajara (Atlas). The reason some of my Mexican friends have explained the obsession with the LMF is that skilled players are given time on the ball and acres of space because of the conditions--everyone learns to be cautious about conserving energy, there aren't the kind of double-teams all the time you get in MLS, and little tricks that take time wind up working. Every foreigner that comes to play in Mexico always says that they are amazed at the speed of the Mexican league... and the condition you have to be in to play at that speed. Take for example the 2 argentinean players for Monterrey who played for San Lorenzo last season. They went straight to Cancun for thier preseason. The team had double sessions every day (fitness in the morning & tactical in the afternoon). After every practice... the whole team would go out to the beach at nights or go out except for those 2 guys. After practice... they would go straight to the whirlpool and then go to sleep. Erviti and Franco kept saying that the pace is real fast and that they culdnt get use to the climate. WE ARE TALKING CANCUN here... Also, Chicho Serna (played with Boca Jrs last season) has stated that he cant get use to the pace. It is taking him a little longer to adapt. When asked what the difference was playing in the MFl and in Boca... he said the pace is the same, the quality is the same... but the problem is that he misses playing infront of a full stadium (he said it jokingly because Puebla is not one of Mexico's best teams). Puebla execs actually invested a lot of money this season.. and the fans are coming out by the masses What I think is abominable is Mexican League goalkeeping. Except for maybe three or four keepers in the league, the guy between the pipes is almost never as good at stopping shots as his teammates are at taking them. The Mexican league does have good goalkeeping... the problem is that we have better mids and forwards. It goes hand in hand. The MLS cant afford to bring in alot of quality players (mids forwards).... so thier keepers dont have it as tough as the ones in the MFL Seriously, a Joe Cannon or a Nick Rimando or a Zach Thornton or a Tony Meola or a Tim Howard could easily start for three-quarters of the teams in the league. Like I said, The Mexican league can afford to bring in top notch players (most of them are mids and forwards) and yet it makes it harder for the keeper. With better goal scorers, the goalkeeping positions is attacked more. Something you need to take into consideration. The MLS cant afford to bring in those type of players.... so naturally the ratio is a lot less and the keepers have it a lot easier. It's interesting that the discussion shifted to national teams, because many people believe that the quality South American imports that make the LMF so good also hurt the national team. Most LMF teams have creative central playmakers--most of them aren't Mexican. And look at Chivas in recent years with its all-Mexican lineup. Not doing too well. Everything has its pros and its cons. It does hurt it, but also helps it. The Mexican league does not play a traditional 4-3-3. The Central mid is a player that is seen rarely now a days. Most coaches in Mexico and in Europe go with modern lineups that consist of 3-5-2, 4-2-2-2, 4-2-3-1. Maybe because there arent too many GREAT creative center midfielders...you have to go with a lineup that best suits your team. A team without that number 10 players who goes with a 4-3-3 will not win. Mexico does not have that number 10 player in the midfield.. and if we did go with a 4-3-3.. we wouldnt win many games.. I think a Holland or a Brazil could win it with a 4-3-3.... the rest of us normal folks have to rely on other tactics. I think that this World Cup showed it too. Most teams played along the sidelines using thier wings more. Where as Brazil used the whole field. Another team that also utilized the whole field was England. ANd Chivas is not doing well because they people in the front office that dont know what they are doing. In the Early and mid 90s.. they had good teams. I prefer MLS because of the better parity. Could an average MLS team beat Club America with its moneyed roster? Probably not. They would....but not on a consistant basis. Could they beat Veracruz, San Luis, Tigres, Puebla, Tecos or Celaya? Absolutely. They would....but not on a consistant basis. Veracruz maybe.... but the thing is... Veracruz and Real San Luis just got promoted and their owners have a lot of money to spend. I think they will be in the top flight for a while... I think Celaya would have it tough.. and would be equal
i honestly believe those of you who rely on statistics and facts are missing the point entirely... points are made in arguments, they are also won in league games which we all know. 3 points for a win, 1 for a tie and 0 points for a loss. This is also true of the first round of the World Cup. When the US played, they advanced, as did Mexico. When the two teams met in the Round of 16 game to determine which team would advance to the QUARTERFINALS, the United States National Team beat Mexico by 2 goals. In a league, that would have earned them 3 points, and a +2 Goal Differential. But you see, this is where it gets confusing. It wasn't a league game, it was the friggin WORLD CUP. A friggin ROUND OF 16 Game. The single most important game ever between the 2 teams with EVERYTHING on the line. And the US won.
stinky It wasn't a league game, it was the friggin WORLD CUP. A friggin ROUND OF 16 Game. The single most important game ever between the 2 teams with EVERYTHING on the line. And the US won. What does a World Cup game have to do with the Domestic Leagues ? You can use your same argument for South Korea vs Italy. So is K-League better than Serie A !??!
stinky Your Trolling powers dont work on me. I know every trick in the Book Now answer my question, is the K-league better than Serie A, Yes or No ?
Good God, thank you for being the voice of reason. To put this another way: We all know US beat Mexico in the World Cup In the starting lineup that day were Claudio Reyna, Eddie Lewis, John O'Brien, Gregg Berhalter, Tony Sanneh and Brad Friedel. I'm sure you would agree all helped contribute to the win. However, all of the aforementined players are on teams that are NOT in MLS Thus, on the basis of one game where half the starting lineup plays outside of the US for their clubs, we cannot say that MLS is better than FMF Had an all MLS lineup been out there, it might have been a start
Put together a tournament in a NEUTRAL setting with all of MLS and all of MLF, and the the final would feature two MLS teams.
Re: comparing mexican and MLS leagues That's really not the issue, though... I was refuting someone's claim that MLS was slower than MFL. By the way, I would submit that the goalkeeping looks so much better in MLS than MFL because attackers aren't given as much space to work with. Less space means less time to line up a shot, and therefore less "unstoppable" shots. At the very least, it seems as though it's more difficult to get a good long-range shot in MLS than in MFL - in MLS the attacker often just doesn't have enough space to even consider shooting, as the defense usually moves to pressure the ball very quickly.