They have the Cup/Copa/Coppa/Coupe/Pokal to scxratch that domestic tourney itch, and the CL/EL/Conference to scratch that continental tourney itch.
People call MLS forced parity, but really, I enjoy the "American" aspect of the salary cap where flat out, you have to be smarter than your opposition. I don't like the idea of being able to buy championships... and honestly go look all over Europe how many teams have been destroyed because they tried to buy championships/promotions. Does MLS need to change some of the roster rules? Absolutely. But end of the day it's simple. You have to have a good academy, you have to have good analytic departments, and you have to have good scouts. An open pyramid is appealing to an extent, but also... I feel pretty strongly in saying say that even in the prem, fans of teams like Bournemouth/Brighton/Brentford would love if a league had some type of equal salary cap where their superior scouting would give them a realistic chance at competing for titles when teams like Man City/Chelsea/Man United can just sit on disastrous signings and not face consequences. And let's not act like conversations to up parody aren't going on. As recently as 2 years ago the Bundesliga were looking at ways to create a playoff system for the champion because they were getting tired of Bayern's monotony.
People always use the word parity, but MLS does not necessary force actual parity. Nor is it what anyone really wants. We want parity of opportunity. No one wants good teams to be punished for being good or to support crappy, idiot teams. But we don't want a system where a smart team either can't win or can't sustain winning by being better at sporting things than others simply because of money. A system where Leicester's title winning team is immediately cannibalized instead of being able to run it back it not a good system. Other teams should have to build up their teams to beat them, not simply take Kante and others from them. How is that an enjoyable fan experience? If that were in the NBA, San Antonio would have gotten Wemby, and the the Knicks, Lakers or Golden State would have simply taken him after his rookie year. Gee, that's fun. People like to call the European system truly competitive because of pro/rel, but the results are significantly LESS competitive because the economic model combined with player movement is far more impactful. When was the last team to actually establish themselves as an elite with a lasting period of success without a Petro-state or Oligarch or other (often sketchy) financial sugar daddy? What's the use of an open pyramid when the only way to progress within it is an absurd amount of outside capital?
Oh I agree. More was making the point I hear people say that "this is forced parity which isn't real"
MLS closed-door franchise system minimizes the risk to the owners so much that I find it boring, personally. If your local team has an owner who has absolutely no ambition for the team to do well and only cares about the money, you are then stuck with a team that will go compete for nothing and own the local market until that person decides to sell (or move...which is another major issue of U.S. sports). There are so many MLB, NBA, and NFL teams that have never had success in my lifetime, and i'm in my late 40's. In MLS, I think of Montreal's team as an example of an owner who will never compete, banking on the growth of the MLS in the long-term due to the investment by other teams. Why invest when you can just park your investment and do the bare minimum -- equivalent to a slum lord. If the team doesn't try to be competitive, and there is no consequence, what's the point?
There’s loads of soccer clubs in Europe that haven’t had significant success in my lifetime so that’s not limited to the U.S. sports setup.
Losing in a “closed” system has consequences as well. Not the same as relegation but the playoff system is an example of a consequence.
When you look over at the yearly turnover in MLS I don't think you can say losing has no consequences in MLS... I also don't think you can say any team other than Montreal aren't trying to win (Montreal has never spent a transfer fee on a DP)... maybe you can throw DC in but I think DC is more incompetence from their owner than anything. There are just different models on how to be successful and different ones have or haven't worked. End of the day you have to be good at scouting in MLS. TLDR version, I think there's 1 maybe 2 teams that I think you can say are not trying. Others either hit or miss (like most teams) or just had flat out incompetence (Chicago with Heitz, KC and LA having no analytics/scouting till the recent years... KC until they hired Matt Lee)
US Leagues are bigger AND flatter than European equivalents. That doesn't guarantee every team a Championship. There are thousands of clubs that you've never even heard of in Europe, and you're mad that, what, the Bills haven't won a Super Bowl? The "parity" of American sports doesn't mean that outcomes are spread evenly, it's still sports! The Browns are not going to become the Patriots overnight. But it's absolutely undeniable that salary caps and parity mechanisms in American sports results in every single team being given ample opportunity to be competitive. Frankly, that creates a superior product, and I'm tired of pretending it doesn't. Having promotion/relegation doesn't mean anything except that teams die throwing money at promotion, die throwing money at trying to stay up, and billionaires can purchase smaller clubs at lower levels of the pyramid to eventually challenge bigger teams by pumping them full of money.
Your primary reason to watch sports is risk to the owners? Weird. There are far, far, far less than in European football. Actually, come to think of it, what teams in MLB haven't had success in your lifetime? The Marlins have won two World Series. Even the Rockies had Rocktober. In your lifetime, two historical losers who hadn't won a series in 100+ years both won World Series despite that. The White Sox won a series. There are those owners in European soccer as well. How many teams will never try to compete for a title, just content to sit in the middle and stay up? Most teams in European soccer have no chance and will never try to compete for a title, period.
It is like when people say promotion/relegation system would not work in the US it is the same with the closed franchise system in Europe and South America. Pro sports in the United States developed differently than it developed elsewhere. I do not think European soccer would embrace a system where Lamine Yamal is at Real Oviedo or Lennart Karl is at FC St Pauli.
Crystal Palace won the FA Cup last season. Go Ahead Eagles won the Dutch Cup last season. Tottenham won the Europa League last season and might go down this year. Hamburg was a traditional power in Germany for a long time but, went down in 17-18 and only came up after last season. Schalke played a Champions League in 18-19, went down in 20-21 and only now are about to come up. Wolfsburg are a side that played in the Champions League not that long ago and they will probably go down. Bournemouth is a stable Premier League side and they were a fourth division side not long. Focusing only on the league champion misses a lot of change.
San Jose is one of those teams that doesn't spend but for this year managed to be good somehow. Montreal and New England did it a few years ago. Bruce Arena was also in charge of that New England. He knows his way around MLS. Props to him. Next year San Jose will be back to where they belong. They'll probably qualify to CCC and suck all year and beyond. Atlanta "spent" a lot on DPs. It's all you can spend on, technically, without affecting the salary cap. They missed the shot on DPs by a mile. It also happens. Toronto is another team that has missed with DPs while overspending on them. In MLS 1 or 2 players can make or break an entire team. Look at LA Galaxy.
Well, there are reasons for that. One, winning a meaningless cup competition doesn't matter. Wigan won the 2013 FA Cup final against Manchester City. That didn't change anything about either club, for obvious reasons. Winning the Champions League gives you a lot of prize money and prestige. The FA Cup gave Wigan 1.3 million pounds, and Man City 900,000 pounds. The former went on to financial ruin and administration in 2020, and they play in League One today. The latter still has billions and won an unprecedented 4 titles in a row en route to 8/15 EPL titles. There are not generally different "competitions" in American sports. Second, the teams don't change in US sports. So you can hardly look at "new" entrants into the league, or teams "falling down" levels. But you can look at postseason droughts, and unless you're the Jets or Sabres, it's very rare to go more than 5-10 years without a Playoff appearance. So, while it doesn't guarantee a trophy, you can be reasonably sure that your team will compete for a trophy within a decade at least one time. That's better than you can say for most of the teams in Europe, considering most won't even come close to the top league of the pyramid.
Here’s the difference between MLS and Yurp. In MLS, the most important thing is how you allocate your resources. The most important thing in Yurp is how many resources you have. That matters in MLS too, but not as much as how you allocate it.
Fair point, but look at how many different competitions here. If in America people remembered regular season champs at all, if that were considered an accomplishment like winning the post season tournament, our system would have many more champions. Also, in our system they aren’t competing for anything equivalent to the Europa League.
The great thing about MLS is that your statement makes no sense. Clubs don’t “belong” anywhere. It comes down to smart ownership/management. Not catchment area.
I think that too narrow of a view. I mean, Wigan has that trophy and Man City doesn’t. To me, that matters.
I do not think any Crystal Palace fan thinks of the FA Cup as a meaningless competition. And European Soccer's closest American comparison is College Football. For Alabama Football anything short of a National Championship is a disappointing season but, for say a Mississippi State fan a 6 win season would make them happy. Everyone comes into the season with their own goals. Right now Chelsea and Brighton are battling for sixth place. 6th place for Brighton is a great season. For Chelsea it is a disaster.
The winner of the German Cup also goes to Europa. IIRC 5 lower level (2BL) clubs have done so. In fact a couple of years ago when Leverkusen won the BuLi they were beaten in the cup by a 3 Liga team which made the finals. Under the old rules that 3Liga club would have gone to Europa as the 2nd place finisher because the winner had already qualified to UCL.
lol 2026 MLS Total Spend by Team (Wages + Transfer Fees) Team Total Spend (Est.) Annual Wages (Payroll) Winter Transfer Fees Inter Miami CF $67.12 Million $19.67 Million $47.45 Million LAFC $29.60 Million $22.82 Million $6.78 Million Atlanta United $30.55 Million $21.28 Million $9.27 Million Austin FC $26.85 Million $12.84 Million $14.01 Million Houston Dynamo $23.73 Million $8.75 Million $14.98 Million FC Cincinnati $22.23 Million $15.96 Million $6.27 Million Real Salt Lake $22.03 Million $11.22 Million $10.81 Million Orlando City SC $21.68 Million $10.02 Million $11.66 Million D.C. United $21.29 Million $6.31 Million $14.98 Million Chicago Fire FC $27.37 Million $17.62 Million $9.75 Million NY Red Bulls $24.16 Million $15.50 Million $8.66 Million LA Galaxy $20.63 Million $16.63 Million $4.00 Million San Diego FC $20.16 Million $15.96 Million $4.20 Million Philadelphia Union $17.08 Million $6.13 Million $10.95 Million Portland Timbers $20.57 Million $15.19 Million $5.38 Million Colorado Rapids $18.83 Million $11.33 Million $7.50 Million Columbus Crew $19.21 Million $14.21 Million $5.00 Million Charlotte FC $17.43 Million $12.23 Million $5.20 Million St. Louis CITY SC $15.82 Million $12.01 Million $3.81 Million FC Dallas $15.01 Million $10.07 Million $4.94 Million Minnesota United $11.61 Million $9.27 Million $2.34 Million New England Revs $17.30 Million $14.71 Million $2.59 Million Nashville SC $15.89 Million $13.53 Million $2.36 Million Vancouver Whitecaps $15.09 Million $12.23 Million $2.86 Million Toronto FC $14.48 Million $12.23 Million $2.25 Million CF Montréal $14.22 Million $12.23 Million $1.99 Million New York City FC $15.80 Million $14.67 Million $1.13 Million Sporting KC $8.52 Million $8.46 Million $0.06 Million San Jose Earthquakes $8.81 Million $8.81 Million $0.00 Million Seattle Sounders $14.83 Million $14.83 Million $0.00 Million the champs of 2025 spent like 4x the bottom dwellers - the rules only apply selectively in MLS and parity hasnt been a thing for YEARS in MLS....its all a sham to let owners lowball salaries as much as possible...NOT to make things equal amongst teams....its flat out not the case yes losing has consequnces for the employees of the clubs, not the owners.....which is a uniquely american thing. it doesnt help the development and quality of play....just makes mls gms and managers more conservative and more likley to squander and squash young talent....mls employees dont really benefit for big transfer fees.....but euro clubs do. (at least moreso)
The only thing "smart" about the San Jose ownership is keeping cost down, way down to maximize shared revenue. I totally agree that is very smart.