Lower the Number of International Slots in MLS

Change my mind

 

I think it stems from an inferiority complex, something other American leagues don't have but MLS is at quite a good level now, not as good as the top 5 Euro leagues of course but not far behind Portugal, The Netherlands and Belgium.

The big difference is that the top talent is spread across the league rather than concentrated at a handful of teams.

That makes the league more competitive but there's no Ajax, Benfica or Club Brugge, or for that matter Club América.

 

Most USMNT only fans aren't really footie fans. They're drawn to the glamor of an event, and full credit, it's a very cool event.
I live in Germany, and the Mannschaft only football fans tend not to be fans of the game, at all, outside of major events. My wife is one. She will even go out to a bar (man, remember that, going out to a bar to watch a game as a communal event) to watch a Euro or WCup match, and cheer and enjoy the thing. She will join me at home watching match after match.
But during regular season she really doesn't see the point of the game. She will be a bit interested if I point out that a couple national team players are involved, but she has never made it through more than five minutes of a club game. Real football fans are club tootball fans, because almost all football is club football. In the US, that would mean being an MLS fan, as well.
We all know the argument, only really liking the game at the highest level, but 1. that isn't national team play, and 2. real fans will find themselves drawn into Halle and Magdeburg in the 3Bund on a frigid Saturday afternoon, and MLS is a whole lot better than that.
I talk to German acquaitances about the game, and they bring up how much better MLS is becoming, how much the like watching matches these days. The games are generally shown at 3 am here.
Real football fans watch football, period.

 

This feels really gatekeeper-y. There are lots of people who only follow college sports and aren’t interested in the NFL or NBA, but I wouldn’t say that they’re not real football or basketball fans because of it. How the game resonates with you is deeply personal. And who and what and why they’re playing mixes into that. This is also akin to saying that if you follow women’s soccer but don’t care for the men’s game you aren’t a real soccer fan because almost all soccer is men’s soccer.

 

It might be, but it's also acknowledging that national teams play occassionally, while clubs play all the time. I am not suggesting that men's clubs, or top clubs, or lower league clubs, etc, represent the real game, just that, IMO, a soccer fan would want to see more than a handful of games per year, and that means club.

 

I don't see how limiting foreign slots is beneficial to anyone. I want the best players on my squad, not players getting slots just because they're American. If American players want slots, they have to earn the slot. Competition begets competition. If you don't make a team, then you have to either work harder or try another line of work.

 

I think there should be rule limiting how much international soccer a player can be called up for in a year. The US team has called up the Rapids’ Acosta a ridiculous amount. Nations League, Gold Cup, and all the qualifiers. They should have to let him rest on the next set of qualifiers (in October I guess).

 

I don't disagree, but to be fair this is a weird year due to the COIVD delays. The Nations League would have happened last year, which means the Gold Cup would have started earlier this year, which means our European players would have been more available for the Gold Cup. And the WCQ's would have been more spread out. I doubt Acosta gets this many callups/appearances in a normal year.

 

To be fair, @AlbertCamus didn't say meaningful competitions. If this rule existed (and again, I think this is a bad year to base it on because of COVID) teams would have to prioritize callups between friendlies and competitive matches. Using Acosta as the example, of his 16 appearances in 2021, 5 of them were in friendlies.

But to be honest, this is mostly a non-issue. Even in this busy year only 3 players have double-digit caps for the Nats so far. Acosta, with 16 (10 starts), Lletget with 15 (11 starts), and Turner with 10 (all starts). And Turner doesn't get to 10 at this point if Steffen doesn't test positive for COVID.

This is really a problem with Gregg Berhalter and the Nats staff riding two players until they drop. At some point they will either ease up or it will come back to bite them as the Galaxy and Rapids will start refusing to release their players when they're requested outside of an international window.

Because @AlbertCamus does have a point. Out of the 22 games played by the Rapids so far this season, Acosta has missed 6 called up to the Nats. And that doesn't include the ones he missed due to testing positive from COVID on return from the Nations League (3 matches). And there's a good chance he'll miss 2 more in October. The Rapids are paying 100% of his salary but getting only 75% of his time.

This is a problem that every league/team is facing though. As FIFA crams more teams into competitions and creates more competitions in chase of the almighty $ (or Euro) players are being asked to play more and more international games, and the club teams that pay their salaries are becoming more and more fed up. This past WCQ window when so many European teams refused to allow their stars to travel was nominally about COVID, but the clubs were very happy to have an excuse to push back on FIFA a bit.

 

It's going to get even worse with FIFA commissioning a feasibility study to hold the World Cup every two years. At some point the Clubs are going to really push back. This could very well be what pushes clubs to break away if FIFA moves forward.

We could see the World Cup turn into an U23 tournament. Players could play in 2-3 WC's and then retire from international football and go play for the Big Clubs and make their big money. That, or the Clubs will get a greater say in releasing their players.

 

I don't think that's going to happen. Look at the vitriol Jamie Carragher got when he said he didn't want to fly halfway around the world to sit on the bench. The biannual World Cup won't happen either.

 

Except for the fact that FIFA only cares about itself and its' bank accounts

 

I hope you're right, but FIFA is hearing the cash register dings and salivating. I mean, they pushed through this Nation's League idiocy as an alternative way to bring in more cash, only to realize people saw it for the crapfest it was. They were backing the ESL because that would be their big money club league, but that was totally trashed so they hid from the fallout, acted as if it was all about the greed of the clubs, alone (yeah, the clubs were greedy, but it was also a FIFA powergrab).
Turns out they've really only got one marketable brand, so they want to maximize the money they make from that.
Another reason to be club over country. Clubs are at least open about their greed. Nats competitions try to hide their greed behind flags and anthems.

 

What has the Nations League to do with FIFA?

 

Wasn't it their idea? Oh well, they didn't come up with one horrible idea.

 

Someone in the Norwegian fed has the idea. Infantino was head of UEFA at the time.

 

If MLS wants to 'limit' international player slots by increasing the number of home-grown American or Canadian players on a roster, that wouldn't necessarily be a bad thing, although I agree that if a player isn't good enough to make a team's roster, they may want to shop around for another squad that could use them or try another line of work.

I don't know about that, Paul. A lot of fans were surprised when FIFA announced a 48-team World Cup for 2026. Many were on board with the idea, but having a World Cup with 16 groups of 3 teams, as is the plan now, just seems weird. It won't feel like a World Cup with a third of the field, presumably with several newcomers, only getting a couple of games.

Along the same lines, MLS is resistant to going with more divisions for its teams. The league could have 44 teams playing in it and STILL insist that 2 conferences is the best way to play a 34-game schedule with no cross-conference games.

In short, people are resistant to changes. I guess this is true with MLS in some ways (and FIFA too, in its own way).

 

If the US misses 2022, this might become a serious issue.

 

How? MLS clubs right now are producing an impressive number of young players and seeing those players grabbing both playing time in MLS and contracts overseas. That part of the system, player development, clearly is not the problem. There's a strong case against lowering the number of foreign slots, as that could lower the overall level of the league. true, it might mean more young US and Canadian players seeing time, but neither national team really cares about playing time for the masses, they want to focus as improving and finishing the very best.
If you consider the impact of MLS youth devo on the US and Canadian nats, it is substantial. In fact, if you compare the US to Canada, there is a large argument to be made that the player pool for the US is not in any way at fault for the bit of nerves about qualification right now. Overall, the US has more talent than Canada. that's pretty clear. canada is a better side. That is not the fault of international players in MLS.

 

Italy has done this after poor tournament performances.

 

And reversed it a couple months later, then re-introduced it again, and re-reversed, etc. Are they in a no-limits, at all, mode right now?

 

Plus with USL improving rapidly and the soon to start MLS Next Pro league, there will be even more avenues for young Americans to get quality competition and playing time. This will lead to faster development, which in turn will increase the quality of MLS, which hopefully the USMNT will be able to benefit from, and take advantage of.

 

They haven't restricted foreign players, they've restricted non-EU players. Also foreign players already in Serie A can be traded without restriction.

62% of Serie A players are foreign compared to 54.5% in Bundesliga and 55.6% in MLS.

EPL 65.5%
Serie A 62%
MLS 55.6%
Bundesliga 54.5%
Ligue Un 53.5%
Eredivisie 48.6%
La Liga 43.8%
Liga MX 37.9%
Brazil 11.5%

Everything deserves an asterix. It's dead easy to get nationality in some countries while in the EPL Scots, Welsh and Irish count as British.

 

Because they are? (Northern Irish at least)