Mls = Concacaf; Mfl = Conmebol?

Apart from your original point, swedcrip, the apparen degree of homogeneity among internationals in the Mexican league is amazing. MLS currently has multiple players (3, actually) from 5 of the 6 FIFA regions, although I don't believe we have any Asians anymore. Mexican league players, meanwhile, are taken entirely from CONMEBOL and CONCACAF. CONCACAF internationals in MLS alone hail from 13 different countries - as many as the entire contingent of Mexican internationals.

Without becoming some kind of MLS triumphalist, it's hard not to draw the conclusion that MLS teams are trying far harder to locate and identify talented players than are the Mexican clubs.

 

Good site. Thanks. BTW, they list Hernandez and Martinez as Mexican.

http://www.mediotiempo.com/jugadores/jugador.php?id_jugador=1580&id_torneo=18
http://www.mediotiempo.com/jugadores/jugador.php?id_jugador=1744&id_torneo=18

 

No CONCACAF player has ever really made a great impact in the MFL.

Carlos Pavon (Hond) and Hernan Medford (CR) are two players that had relative success for a brief period in Mexico. But its not like they were superstars or still in the minds of the fans. Back in the 40s a couple costaricans had a couple good season, but no legends and still not remembered

But how can conclude that MLS is trying harder to find talent?

The MFL has national team players from every CONMEBOL nation except Brazil (the MFL has one Brazlian player in the U-23 team).

The MFL is not the same MFL from 20 years ago. the South Americans that come for the most part come in their early 20s. Many of them get called up to thier respective NTs after establishing themselves in the MFL.

I dont mean to disrespect the carribean player or central american player, but getting a NT play from conmebol means more because of the level of play and the depth.

 

the limit is still 5.

The thing is that you can register 6, but you can only suit up 5. And because of the presidential order, all games played in Mexico City, only 4 can be on the field

 

I have to agree with LMvCP here...Look, the purchasing power of Mexican clubs is strong, as soccer is wildly popular there (hence big ratings, nice crowds, jersey sales, etc.), powerful corporations own clubs, and their clubs have access to the US market (and play friendlies which serves as another source of income)...So when it comes to buying players, they can easily afford players from Brazil and Argentina, the two nations that arguably provide the most talented players in the world AND are sold in great numbers overseas....Surely, the very best usually will end up in the top 4 leagues in Europe, but after that , it gets pretty competitive... MFL has been known to pay yearly salaries of 1-2 million a season, so for the players who want to make a nice living, it's not bad at all...
Lately (last 3-4 yrs) it has also been noticed that a lot of players who first went to Europe and did not pan out, or have had little first team playing time, go to the MFL,and these are quite capable players....I'd venture to say that regardless of whether US fans in general like the particular playing style at times seen in MFL, it is one of the top 10 leagues in the world....... Conmebol players, considering their league's poor financial health, particularly when compared to Mexico's wealth in soccer capital makes it possible for Mexican squads to maintain strong lineups that play together for long periods (ie. not having to sell lots of players, as most SA clubs have to in order to survive) So when someone doesn't work out, these players change teams within the MFL, get loaned back to a club in SA, etc. and the team usually will be able to afford buying someone else from SA...It's that simple.......As SA players have been more successful than CA, NA players, or Caribbean players in the MFL, they keep on buying them despite the relatively higher price they have to pay when compared to those aforementioned....But since they CAN afford them, it's no big deal......

 

But with only two CONCACAF players currently in the MFL (I don't know anything about the history), can you really distinguish cause from effect here? I have no doubt that it's easier for a CONCACAF player to make an impact in MLS than in MFL, but have so few made an impact because they're so inferior, or because there have been relatively few given the opportunity?

Because they've only taken players from very, very obvious locations. Obviously, there's more talent in Brazil (or Chile, or wherever) than in Trinidad, and it makes sense to spend more time there; however, the talent is also significantly cheaper in Trinidad than in Brazil; considering that there are currently numerous CONCACAF players starting in the Premiership, the Bundesliga, and Serie A, it seems strange that so few, if any, would have gotten there through the region's historically dominant league.

I wasn't implying anything about the quality of the MFL's foreigners. But I think that people tend to think far too much about the quality of a player's country of origin, rather than about the player's actual talent. Daniel Demetrio Hernandez got bought by Necaxa from MLS, and last I checked, was a starter for the team. But the only reason that he got that attention was his ethnicity. Has Shalrie Joseph, who displaced him and is superior, gotten any attention from the MFL (what are the Primera A's rules on foreigners, by the way)?

Are the teams so glutted with South Americans that they can't take a chance on a younger, less proven, cheaper player from CONCACAF? Why is it that the Big 4 European leagues can find players from China (#48 FIFA Ranking), Switzerland (49), Wales (57), Australia (58), Scotland (67), Israel (69), Ukraine (87), Austria (90) etc. but MFL can't find anybody from Costa Rica (33), Honduras (47), Jamaica (53), Guatemala (64) or Trinidad (65)?

 

They rather go for the proven product. It will take a coach taking a chance on a concacaf player, and making a big impact for the MLF to want to imitate.

But seriously if MLS had the money they rather buy the more talented south american players.

 

But with only two CONCACAF players currently in the MFL (I don't know anything about the history), can you really distinguish cause from effect here? I have no doubt that it's easier for a CONCACAF player to make an impact in MLS than in MFL, but have so few made an impact because they're so inferior, or because there have been relatively few given the opportunity?

They have been given the opportunity. Costaricans have had the most success out of any but that still doesnt say much. But very few have produced. The ones that did were Hernan Cabalceta and Rafael Meza. The only reason I know of Cabalceta is because he played for my favorite club (Club America) back before the league was professional. Meza won a goal scoring title back in the early 40s when the league still want professional.

I dont want to use the word inferior, but the ones that I have seen are inferior from a technical standpoint.

There have been a couple carribean players that have tried and ended playing in the 3rd and 4th divisions, and still could not cut it.

Because they've only taken players from very, very obvious locations. Obviously, there's more talent in Brazil (or Chile, or wherever) than in Trinidad, and it makes sense to spend more time there;

Why would it make more sense when many of those places do not have the proper training or adequate leagues ?

If going to a place like that to look for physical specimens is the case, then its the arguement of strength over technique.

however, the talent is also significantly cheaper in Trinidad than in Brazil;

It may be cheaper, but cheaper isnt always better. They are cheap because the infrastructure isnt there hence the infrastructure is a barrier in production of these player. You really cant put a real value to them

considering that there are currently numerous CONCACAF players starting in the Premiership, the Bundesliga, and Serie A, it seems strange that so few, if any, would have gotten there through the region's historically dominant league.

Many of these come from ex-colonies, and to this day still have some ties back to the crown. The Dutch already know what to expect from thier former colonies as do the British.

Assume you have 2 kids; one being a physical specimen who lacks technique and the other who is as fragile as a vase but clearly shows technique (ball control, ball placement, trapping, ambidextrious of the feet, etc)

who do you think would advance further in a years time and which would be more cost effective? Which "investment" would get you a faster return?

my money goes to the guy that has technique because in a years time, you can always bulk and strengthen the kid with a proper diet and weight training system.

Sure, in a years time a kid can improve with technique, but it take a lot longer. There are professional players in top leagues who are worthless when using thier "other" foot.

If money was not an issue, it would make sense to have actual academies in those poor countries and get them real young (but a question of morality and ethics comes in play with child labor and neo-slavery). But even then it is still an uphill battle because its still the host countries job to provide the proper infrastructure.

I wasn't implying anything about the quality of the MFL's foreigners. But I think that people tend to think far too much about the quality of a player's country of origin, rather than about the player's actual talent.

A players country of origin should be taken into account. As a promoter or scout, it is important to know what is taught at the youth levels of X country, the methodology, etc.

Daniel Demetrio Hernandez got bought by Necaxa from MLS, and last I checked, was a starter for the team. But the only reason that he got that attention was his ethnicity. Has Shalrie Joseph, who displaced him and is superior, gotten any attention from the MFL (what are the Primera A's rules on foreigners, by the way)?

I think its question of Hernandez having a promoter with contacts in the MFL. Unfortunately, that is a sad reality in the business of football.

Same as the first division. 5 can suit up. only 4 can be on the field in Mexico City

Are the teams so glutted with South Americans that they can't take a chance on a younger, less proven, cheaper player from CONCACAF?

How cheap do you want them? (number in paranthesis indicatates the age they came to the MFL) Reinaldo Navia (22), Sebastian Gonzales (22), Sebastian Abreu (23), Sebastian Rey are all players for thier respective national teams and have key roles for thier NTs. Cruz Azul currently has Luciano Figueroa and Cesar Delgado (both on the U-23) team who are also on the Sr national team for Argentina.

Atlante paid 1.1 M for Sebastian Gonzales. Thats walking out of the deal like a bandit. They got a young, established player that played for Colo Colo (Chiles best club) and when the time comes to sell him to europe, they will make out again like bandits. Even if they loaned him out.

Why is it that the Big 4 European leagues can find players from China (#48 FIFA Ranking), Switzerland (49), Wales (57), Australia (58), Scotland (67), Israel (69), Ukraine (87), Austria (90) etc. but MFL can't find anybody from Costa Rica (33), Honduras (47), Jamaica (53), Guatemala (64) or Trinidad (65)?

Because they are still getting cheaper products that are proven. And Mexico also has a population of 100M and even then, Mexico is still developing thier less populated regions of the country. States like Chiapas, Oaxaca, Yucatan, Quitana Roo, Guerrero, etc still need more infrastructure (from a football standpoint)

 

Just to add to this discussion, there are currently two Canadians on Cruz Azul's youth team: Carlos Rivas and Petro Czoli.

 

it is apparent from radio reports that Mexican clubs will not only take part in Copa Libertadores, as they have for a few years, but also in Copa Sudamericana, starting in next year's edition.....i think for MLS clubs, copa sudamericana would be by far the most feasible tournament, and one that should be given a closer look.......

 

China isa huge market for the future and many players signed from there are done for marketing reasons.

Switzerland (49), Wales (57), Scotland (67), Israel (69), Ukraine (87), Austria (90) all play in UEFA so have a higher exposure level at both national team and club level.

Australians tend to move to europe to explore club possibilities.

Lets not ignore the fact that the market for talent in europe is much more savage and competitive so clubs are forced to look further afield for talent. If MLS were competing with MFL for these second tier Conmebol players MFL would have to look around more for players too.

Who is MFL competing against? No one.

 

Exactly. Just like European coaches not as willing to risk their job by buying an American player.

Just like the old business saying, "nobody ever got fired for buying IBM."