Found another owner who won't be voting in major of big salary changes for the next CBA. “We have to recognize that what we most want is to be competitive. We all recognize that life doesn’t fall the way that you just go out and if you throw a bunch of money at it, for instance, like some teams want to do, that you’re going to win. It doesn’t work that way.” #MNUFC… pic.twitter.com/DnvhCMRBMI— MNUFC NEWS (@mnufcnews) July 17, 2026
"If you throw a bunch of money at it that you are going to win. It doesn't work that way. We've seen that multiple times at the World Cup". It was pretty clear he said at the World Cup and that anyone can interpret it as him thinking National Teams throw money at players to win the World Cup. Now maybe he meant to say "We've seen that multiple times in the world" but again he'll be wrong. In every league and club tournament in the world the team or teams that usually spends the most are the ones fighting for Championships.
I think the reference was to teams full of highly paid players humbled by lesser teams. Minnesota are a pretty penny pinching bunch, nothing we didn't know.
Funny thing is I didn't see him say anything about throwing money at only players. And I look at the current USMNT coach and I understand exactly what he's saying...
He didn't mention throwing money at coaches. It's a World Cup. It has always happened but at the end the teams full of highly paid players are the ones to win. They are highly paid for a reason.
Sure, but that the question was if Minnesota was gonna be a team that spends more money on players, right? And even if his comment is supposed to be taken that spending money on coaches doesn't guarantee success, it's a bit of a red herring. It's pretty well established that the quality of the players on the field is the biggest determinant of success.
I took his comment in the way it was clearly intended, which was just throwing money at a team (in whatever format, players, coaches, training, infrastructure, etc.) isn't a guarantee of success.
How do you understand that it was clearly intended that way? The question wasn't about Minnesota spending on players. It was whether we could count them as supporting changes to the league spending rules that would allow teams in general to spend more if they chose to. At the minimum, it's a deflection. Nobody would argue that raising the cap isn't going to improve the quality of the players the league can sign.
Point is, its not an embarrassing comment about throwing money at World cup players because he never said anything about throwing money at World Cup players. He said throwing money at a team or a situation doesn't guarantee success, and we see that in the way less-funded teams are beating higher-funded teams at the World Cup. Your attempt to spin it as something else is you looking for a reason to complain. Common sense makes his point very clear.
That was sort of his point. He's saying we don't need to spend as much money as other clubs because they don't always win but we'd be better off if we didn't let them spend it in the first place. Or something like that.
This is why his statement doesn't make any sense. He's mixing two different arguments that don't agree with each other. The first is Minnesota wants to maintain competitive parity by not allowing the other teams to spend like they want to. The second is teams that spend more don't win more - and he gives the world cup as an example - which is a terrible example because the final 4 teams are just about who you would expect them to be based on their roster market value.
Hold up. Your original statement was: Not "look, the less-funded teams don't really win at the World Cup" or any derivation of that. You wanted to take a shot at him for suggesting that World Cup teams were throwing money at players, which he never actually stated. If you want to change to a more supportable argument, be my guest, but that doesn't take away from what I was responding to, namely that your attempt to take a potshot at him was weak and didn't follow from the actual statement.
Someone is.... ummm... salty? Andrew Carleton dropping some insight 👀 https://t.co/OzuftU5Km2 pic.twitter.com/hxpoz9O2QN— USMNT CORNER (@USMNTCORNER) July 18, 2026 Ricardo Pepe, Cavan Sullivan, Quinn Sullivan, Jesus Ferreira, Paxten Aaronson, Brenden Aaronson, Jack McGlynn, Tyler Adams. Diego Luna, Gozo, Diego Fagundez (Uruguayan, but still born American), etc.
Reminds me of those who insist pro/rel is needed to make MLS more competitive while also saying playing time should be gifted to young Americans.
We're supposed to promote the 900 or so American players in USL and Next Pro to MLS because it's a higher level. Do they not see the logic fallacy here?
For those who don’t know: Carleton is a huge Trump supporter. Like, a “January 6” sized supporter. I don’t want us to argue back and forth about politics; there’s a separate forum for that. But I do want to note that Trump has a very clear view on foreigners coming to America to work. My point is, Carleton is probably making a political argument here, not a soccer argument. I’m not going to argue here whether Trump’s opinion is good or bad; like I said, we have a forum for that.
I mean he was Atlanta's prized homegrown signing and then he had to compete with Almiron, and then Pity and Barcp for playing time. OTOH, this is professional sports. Less than 1% of all athletes ever get to that level to begin with, and even fewer have longevity. He also struggled to make a go of it in USL as well. Not to mention his off field shenanigans.
He played gold with Trump like 18 months ago. He had a pretty good last 18 months...prior to playing Argentina. https://www.usatoday.com/story/spor...-of-golf-round-with-donald-trump/90924408007/ Trump invited him. Kane was in the Palm Beach area roughly 18 months ago, and the president asked him out for a round.
He has a point. It's the same point brought up in Liga MX all the time. That's why they implemented the rule that U20 players need to play a certain amount of minutes per season and if not a team will get penalized with points deduction. In MLS there are way more foreigners than in Liga MX because of the nature of how green card holders are treated. But....isn't that what we want? Don't we want our players to compete against better competition for a spot to get better? Didn't Pulisic compete in Dortmund against better players as a teen and still got minutes and eventually won a spot? The competition in top European leagues > competition our domestic players play against in MLS. So our MLS developed players should have an easier time winning a spot as opposed to jumping to Europe. Another issue is that coaches, as he says, prefer the foreign players over domestic even if the foreigners aren't better. Why? I don't know. It's the exact same complain that has been brought up in Liga MX for years. And for that there isn't any solutions. It's just a coaches decision.