Biggest effect of Brexit on English teams will be that non-UK passport holding EU players will be treated as foreign rather than domestic.
1. Surprised but I was able to find it. There are only 7 team with a positive operating income for total of $21M. Of course the rest of the teams were negative with the two worst at -$35M How do the Impact exist. pic.twitter.com/HOflazjSYB— Will Parchman (@WillParchman) November 4, 2019 2. I meant significantly like would be needed to bring about the change someone was talking about.
Mckennie spent a year with u19s. That doesnt sound like a quality player to me. You always know someone is true MLS fan when they point to Canadians from Ghana as sign of the ability to develop players. Sure Davies looks the part. This also is USMNT forum. Why would I care about an MLS team lucking into an athletic freak? Who was the african kid who was eligible for the US that bombed out at Vancouver? Where is he now?
I know there are many differing opinions on this but I am of the opinion that it is inevitable that MLS will eventually be one of the dominating leagues in the world. I believe that the number one driving force will be money. The only question will be the talent level of the American player when this eventually occurs. Will it be an American dominated league or will it be something like the EPL? A few of the factors that I consider important: 1. Money The amount of money available (IMO) will increase as TV/media contracts increase....this will be driven by the popularity of soccer in the US. Will this take 5, 10, 20 years? I don't know but I am very sure that it will happen. 2. Standard of living/quality of life/safety/racial issues (monkey chants etc). this is probably at least neutral compared to most of Europe and probably better than some regions. How many black players might consider playing in a high quality league based in the USA if it meant avoiding racial abuse that is rar too prevalent in some of the leagues in Europe? The lower the standard of living, the more money required to lure a top player. 3. Quality of play/status of titles/cups etc. The one area of advantage (aside from the actual level of play in Europe compared to MLS) in Europe is currently the CL. The key will be filling in the rest of the roster with top money. Edit: Whether or not the US will have top 4 talent is a different question.
Neither Parks or Hyndman were first choice starters in MLS. They started 24 games between them covering for injuries and suspensions. Parks looked like a fish out of water at first but improved gradually as the season went on. They've signed him to lead them to the Premier League. Yes MLS isn't EPL or La Liga. Davies has been starting at left-back.
To decide which academies are "creating" talent their needs to be a definition of what "creating" is. Do they need to be there at a certain age? Be there for a certain amount of time? Both of those above and Adams would qualify but FCD has others that may be more murky. Chris Richards played there for 1/12 -2 years and went to Bayern. the two Argentine brothers played for 1-3 years (it was a while ago and I don't remember) and one has played for Everton and the Argentine national team and the other in Mexico. Richard Sanchez was sold to the Mexican league or doesn't that count? NYRB /MetroStars have a lot of players that played for them for a while and moved to Europe like Tim Howard, Jozy Altidore, Juan Aguedelo but maybe on Altidore was in their Academy. Other clubs have players that have moved to Europe and skipped MLS like McKennie did to FCD so do they (Ledezma, Soto etc ) count? Oh and didn't Montreal sell a kid to a Spanish league?
hasn’t the TV viewership ratings been consistently poor for MLS? IIRC, cornhole does it better on ESPN than most MLS games.
Yikes! Hyndman started 10 of 15 regular season games, 2 of 3 open cup games, and 1 of 3 playoff games. That is one game shy of two thirds. https://www.transfermarkt.us/emerson-hyndman/leistungsdaten/spieler/223047/saison/2018/plus/1#MLS1 Davies has started 2 out of 10 Bundesliga matches, 0 out of 4 CL matches, 1 out of 2 Pokal matches, 0 out of 1 supercup match. That is 3 starts out of a possible 17. https://www.transfermarkt.us/alphonso-davies/leistungsdaten/spieler/424204/saison/2019/plus/1#L1 I found the highlights of Davies most recent Bundesliga start. He was involved in goals 1, 2, 3, and 5. He did make a pass the Lewandowski who did what does so Davies get credit for an assist. I'd take Antonee Robinson over him any day at left back. Of course, Robinson is crucified around here for getting beat once when Brazil was targeting him and Davies, who looks absolutly lost on defense, is considered an MLS succes story. It is clear from these highlights that MLS didnt prepare him for that game. edit: Davies started today vs Olympiakos
Is this an implication that Vancouver has an elite developmental program because of the success of Davies? If so, who else is in their pipeline? I do think that Dallas and New York Red Bulls both have a history of identifying/developing young talent...
We have 29 teams in MLS if you count the pipeline (Austin, Miami, Nashville, Sacramento, St. Louis). That's a lot of demand for players and we're not done yet. Here's a Guardian story on MLS interviewing Euros who play here https://www.mlssoccer.com/post/2019...-weigh-level-mls-how-players-compare-overseas I'd like to see the league develop a better schedule which also incorporates "hubs" in geographical areas where teams would play more and avoid long flights. Those Seattle @ NE games never did much for me.
There are numerous quality players that MLS academies are producing. It hasn't gotten into full swing yet, but clubs are now signing academy players to first team contracts all over the place--these are guys who have been trained as professionals from ~13 years old on. Many of them haven't been full pros long enough yet to break out. Many more won't ever break out. Tyler Adams might be the only "star" to develop in MLS so far, but he's not the only quality player to be developed. Pomykal, Aaronson, Efrain Alvarez, Alphonso Davies, George Bello, Gianluca Busio, James Sands, and a half dozen current FCD guys. Like I said, give it maybe 5 more years and I think we'll start to see more and higher quality players than this brief list. Yes, SUM, really. SUM is wholly owned by the MLS club owners. It is disgusting, I agree.
Remember Dempsey and Howard were both in their mid- twenties when they moved to England. Howard was a product of the Olympic Development Program and Dempsey played college soccer.
But USSF doesn't fund SUM, SUM funds USSF to the tune of $15 million. Who else would pay to cover the MNT in its current state?
Take it up with @bsky22! I don't know all the shady shit that goes on with SUM and I'm not about to try to have an argument about it with anyone (not that I think you're looking to argue). I will say, in reply to @bsky22, that there's no way in hell that USSoccer "funding" SUM is the reason that MLS is profitable.
Who said anything about the USMNT? I think Davies has higher potential as soccer player, but the American kid in the chapionship is much better left back today. I also think Davies wouldnt have caused so much trouble for us if kid from the Championship instead average MLS left back.
All of those kids are prospects. People were saying the same thing about Kelyn Acosta four years ago. Those prospects are at the age that MLS have failed over and over again to get them to their potential.
I dont know... no way in hell. That sounds about right. I am sure someone who is very familiar with SUM will come along this thread and educate us. What do you think makes them profitable then? Expansion fees?
I think it’s safe to say that the usnt games earn more than $15m per year for SUM. So the answer is networks would pay.
I do know that the ratings have been poor. I am not sure exactly what the trend is/hs been over time? I can't imagine that they are worse now than they were 10 or 20 years ago but who knows? I do know that the tv deals have improved over time. It is possible that the tv deals have been based more on speculation than actual performance (I have no idea one way or the other). All that being said, I fully expect the tv deals to improve over time and that is ultimately what I believe will lead to an increase in quality. I don't often agree with @bsky but he is spot on with regard to the middle and bottom of the roster in MLS. (he said that is the main issue with MLS quality right now....I hope I am paraphrasing him correctly) TAM and other money has made a dent but there is still a long way to go. Of course, right now, I am talking about paying players from abroad. Over the course of time, more US players will be capable of playing at the levels above as well. Either way, MLS can be made into a top league. It will not be for some time. I think I said 5? 10? 15? 20? but I really don't expect it within 5 years and while I don't think having US players is technically necessary, I don't see it happening without a significant number of decent quality US players. I expect it to take 15-20 years, if not a bit more. (I wouldn't consider a league that consists mostly/largely of teams that would only be mid to lower table EPL teams to be a top league...MLS would have to be at the level of the big 4)
How is that safe to say? Eight friendlies and a couple of Nations League games = $15 million profit???? Sorry forgot the women. 22 friendlies and the She Believes Cup = $15 million profit????
MLS is top 15. I mean in today's Guardian you have Swedish and Swiss players saying that MLS is better than their domestic leagues. The Swiss Super League is ranked 14th in Europe by World Football Power. The improvement in MLS over the last 5 years has been boosted by a combination of the Argentinian financial crisis, forcing South American players to look elsewhere, and target allocation money. Most of the home-grown players are filling in slots that would have been filled by college grads a few years ago and the lower end of the roster, but the law of averages suggests that a few will turn out to be very good.