This thing has stunk from the onset. To bring a new team in that is an offspring of an existing team just takes away credibility from our league. It's like saying we play second fiddle to MFL. I don't even like the idea of playing our all-stars against their teams. It says that we need all-stars to beat them, and although it may be the case, it's not the image I would want to promote. And this whole thing about changing rules is stupid. The rules are there for a reason and if goat boy doesn't want to play then he can take his sorry Mexican arse and go home!!!
I don't want to see MLS add more foreign spots. The league has helped develop American players so much since 1996. Taking spots away from US players is NOT a good thing in anyway. I don't want to see the league sell out just to get an investor that laughs in the face of our league. How can anyone invest in our league and not have the decency to believe in and respect our players. F-Chivas.
I don't particularly like the potential rule exception for Chivas San Diego (or whatever), but I don't see as much ahrm as many of you. Why would allowing Chivas to have more foreign players cause Chivas to have an advantage? Especially when there has been no mention of increasing the salary cap for Chivas. Good US players are cheaper than good Mexican players, because the Mexican league pays better than MLS. (N.B. This is an assumption on my part; please feel free to rebut it if I am missing something) So, if the exception given to Chivas is simply that they are allowed more Mexican players (as one likely possibility of what the exception could be), I don't see how that gives Chivas an advantage if they are still restricted by the salary cap (of course, the MLS salary cap has often been "flexible" in practice). ALso, I don't fully understand "no respect" for our league argument. So what if Chivas is trying to appeal to Mexican Americans? Are you arguing that we shouldn't appeal to Mexican Americans? Are Mexican-Americans any less a part of the country? Perhaps I don't fully understand the "respect" argument, but it seems to be based on some perceived underlying disprespect for US players. I don't see Chivas' desire to be a disrepsect for US players. Rather, it's just a desire to have players who appeal to Mexican-Americans. That's not saying anything about the quality US players. Nor is it saying anything at all about the quality of MLS. On the whole, I'm concerned but willing to wait and see exactly what they come up with. I'm not starting with the assumption that Garber et al. are complete idiots. I think they are aware of most of these concerns and will come up with something acceptable. I especially think that they will fashion the rules so as to maintain parity (i.e. not give Chivas an advantage). The only argument that I think has potential merit is that other teams who have worked under and continue (presumably) to work under the 3 SI restriction. And since it is the owners of those teams who will make the decisions regarding what rules govern Chivas, I don't have much problem with it. I suggest remaining open to some change; wait and see what they come up with. See if it works. Then judge. Recall that just about everybody on these boards thought the MLS v. Chivas all-star game would be a disaster, and yet it turned out great. Have a little confidence. Sorry if I rambled. Hope it wasn't too confusing. Professor B
I don't think that anyone is arguing that it gives Chivas an "advantage". The argument here is that it makes the league look Mickey Mouse. What respectable league allows one team to blatantly work under a different set of rules than the rest. that cannot be tolerated. You either join the group properly, or you don't join at all. i'd rather see MLS stay at 10 than add someone who is looking for special favors.
I have to agree... Say whatever you want about MLS, but its bent over backwards to develop young players. And even when national men's and youth call-ups have gotten in the way of important league matches, everyone--teammates, coaches, and fans--have respected these decisions with very little bitching. Will having a Mexican team with primarily Mexican players change this attitude? Chivas originally approached the MLS at a time when they needed a boost, and the league acted like big puppy dog, jumping up and down and wetting itself with glee. But I'd rather MLS stepped back a bit and looked at the long-term future rather than a quick boost. Just my feelings. I would expect some to disagree.
There were people earlier in the thread arguing exactly that . . . that it would give Chivas an advantage. But other people before me had responded to that in various ways, so certainly many in the thread were not arguing advantage. That was just one of many arguments I wanted to address. I can certainly see your point here, even if I'm not sure I agree with it, at least not to the extent you take it. It's not as though Chivas is going to join the league and operate under different rules without the permission of the other clubs/owners. "Special favors"? Maybe they're just looking to serve a certain interest group. Maybe they're just trying to be successful in that area. And I would guess that the rest of the owners want him to be successful. I guess you could call it "special favors" but you could also just call it something that works. Yes, (if the article is correct) they will be operating under different rules. So what? If everyone in the league agrees that that is what they want to do, I'm willing to give it a try. (By the way, out of curiosity, how does the A-league handle Canadian teams and the foreign player limits?) I can kind of see how it might be perceived as being "mickey mouse" but I just don't buy it. As long as the playing field is level so to speak, why is it "mickey mouse"? I certainly would see it as much less "mickey mouse" and much more of a respectable league than a league where two or three teams have all the money and all the good players (e.g. half or more of the leagues in Europe (Scotland, Turkey, Greece, etc.)). There seems to be an underlying issue here (and I don't necessarily mean you, onefineesq) involving respect of US players and of MLS. Some, but not all, people seem to be taking this as an insult to MLS and an insult to American players. I don't see Chivas' actions as involving any sort of disrespect to either MLS or American players. Chivas just has a certain target audience, Mexican-Americans. And maybe some of this is about people being upset that those Mexican-Americans would rather root for Mexican players. I, as a US fan, would rather they rooted for Americans, but I understand and respect their choice. So I guess I don't understand why the league can't serve their interests as well. It's not as though the league is doing this against the other teams' wishes. It's the owners of those teams who will have the ultimate say in the matter. I guess it comes down to the fact that as I view it now, I don't see it as making MLS look "mickey mouse" or in any way less "respectable." But I also don't think I'm necessarily going to convince anyone who believes otherwise! Professor B
Good discussion. Definitely some good ideas. I don't want to see a team made up of internationals, or even heavily international. MLS was created to help build the caliber of the U.S. players (and to make money). While U.S. players will get better playing against the best opposition they can (and thus there have been calls for MLS teams to play inter alia Copa Libertadores) they also get better playing alongside the best. Thus having teams which are mixed with veterans and internationals is the way for U.S. players to get the most exposure to the best. We will learn that way. Now if Chivas wants MLS to hire them all Latin American players, fine, so long as they meet the rules. As has been pointed out, Hispanics are the largest minority group in the United States. There are more than enough players who are citizens of the United States AND Hispanic to fill many teams. The trick is to find them. And therein lies a great cache for Chivas USA and for the U.S. The Hispanic players are often overlooked in this country, though we see more of them come up through the ranks every year (e.g. Memo Gonzalez). Chivas can certainly act as a lightning rod for Hispanic support, and for a growing sense of taking it to heart that the U.S. is now home. For all of our longing for the homeland, and I'm as guilty of it as anyone else, we now live in the U.S. and only a small percentage will actually go back. Having a team of Latin Americans, the majority of whom were born, raised, or got their green card or citizenship, would be a team of guys that a lot of people, throughout the country, could identify with. Look at me, I've never lived in Pittsburgh, but my favorite baseball team is the Pittsburgh Pirates because of Roberto Clemente (the first Latin American in the Hall of Fame, born in Carolina Puerto Rico). Chris Armas is my favorite soccer player because a) he played for the PR nat'l team and b) he plays for the Fire. It's a whole identity thing, and it could be strongest if it's not a bunch of imports and a team breaking the set rules, but a team which makes this country stronger. Hope that made sense.
So...., what about the alternative of exempting MLS to allow a a few border ( Mex. & Can.) locales to join the league. That way, the Chivas could be based in TJ. The same rules would apply, except somewhat reversed.
As far as I am concerned the problem with this is based on a couple of things: 1. You shouldn't change the rules to accomodate 1 person. We all bitch and moan when MLS makes up rules for player allocation, and this is the same thing. If Vergara doesn't want to play by the rules of the league then he can ride his goat back to Guadalajara. 2. Calling it Chivas USA is cheesey in my opinion. It pawns it off as an offshoot of Chivas and therefore as a second rate team (i.e. a second rate league). People can say they don't think that but it seems that way to me. Haven't we all heard the phase "It will never be the same as the original"? It's like Euro-Disney and "New" Coke. Sorry, but the original is better and the public always percieves it as such. I don't have a problem with Vergara buying into this league and taking all his international players from Mexico. What he did in Costa Rica and Spain is fine. He didn't come in and try to change what was there, he bought a team. You don't see everyone complaining about the idea of Club America's owners buying the Quakes, because they are not talking about calling them Club America de San Jose and asking the league to let them have all Mexican/Hispanic players. The problem here is the way they are going about this, not that they are doing it.
FIFA may have a problem with this. There is something about teams from one country playing in anther country's domestic league if there is a viable domestic league in that country. I believe we could (and do) get away with it in Canada because they have no league but I don't think it would work with Mexico. I'm pretty sure I heard this when people were talking about the idea of Celtic and Rangers leaving SPL for EPL. I'm pretty sure the Welsh teams are allowed to play in England because of the lack of a Welsh domestic league. If someone knows more about this please feel free to jump in and elaborate or correct.
todays Star-Ledger here in New Jersey reports ( no link) under MLS Notes reads Commissioner Dan Garber said last week that an expansion teamwill play either in San Diego or Houston, probably in 2005. Candidates for further expansion include Cleveland, Oklahoma City, Rochester, Philadelphia and another team in the New York area.
Think like a billionaire I can't believe everyone is so worried about this. This is 99% PR. Vergara is trying to claim that he wants to field the best Mexican players he can under the new team's banner. This is the line he wants to sell the fans. As a business man, he doesn't want MLS to compete for top flight Mexican players. He has the tradition of Chivas to uphold. Would he even ask MLS to bid for a top flight player from the Mexican league? No, but he would love to say that he is fielding the most that he can or the most in the league.
Why is it that every time there's an article about expansion there is always a new city/area tossed in?