I think it's been fairly well established that there's a big cultural difference. In the US, we have much more of a team spirit culture across all sports, and players help each other improve to help the team win. In European soccer, I'd imagine practices are more intense in part because they are all cut-throatly competing for spots, or so the stereotype goes. I think that is all generally accurate. Toss in longer travel and worse weather and MLS teams would be kind of insane to train intensely in Orlando or Houston for too long. Where I think soccer fans are odd is the idea that competition, and specifically in practice, is the only way to improve and the source of all improvement. Lots of people don't need the extra motivation, or find ways to manufacture it. Collaborative atmospheres often consistently yield better results than competitive in many venues. I don't think intensity or competition is bad, but the issue is in ascribing the difference in the player's perception of intensity as equivalent to quality. Mihailovic may find it much more intense, but he just went out, started and scored in a short time. Other players have walked into starting spots, like Adams, or Vines, etc, even if leagues that are generally a step up. If it only takes people a week or two to adjust, is it important? If these players are good enough, does that mean the development plan in the US really wasn't bad at all? Perhaps MLS practices could be more intense. Some probably are -- early Almeyda practices were very much. I'm sure it helps in some ways, but for some personalities and some situations, it probably isn't as helpful.
The quality of MLS isn’t bad and is at a level where a good MLS player will likely translate in the Netherlands, Belgium, Scotland, etc. It’s more hit or miss in terms going directly to a top 5 league, but I think MLS will eventually get to that point. I think we still have an issue that the average caliber of American coaching does not measure up to what’s in Europe (but that too will improve over time). But I’m sure there are MLS teams that train more intensely than others and where you’d see less of a gap. I think the top MLS guys also just have less competition for their spots. Whereas someone like Mihailovic is a good player for AZ but there’s a lot more competition within the team. As MLS continues to increase their salary numbers teams will get less too heavy over time. There’s also the pressure of relegation which can be alot. That’s likely never coming to MLS. There’s also just the fact that in Europe, the club teams are very much the only game in town in terms of the sporting landscape. You have way more people in a particular city who care super intensely compared to MLS teams. We have alot of teams who have definitely built a local following, but I don’t know if there any markets where the MLS team is the primary sporting team people support. I think of it as the difference in how people in say DC respond if DC United wins or loses versus say how people in Ann Arbor respond based on whether the University of Michigan football team wins or loses. There’s alot more pressure on the latter as compared to the former.
Right. But the issue is that there's this assumption that outside pressure is the driving factor in better performance and player improvement. I'd question that a bit if Mihailovic can be in a low pressure environment his whole life, then go and grab a starting spot right quick versus all this people who had high pressure their whole lives. I don't think it is a binary answer either way.
1. Take whatever European team you hold to be the paragon of "intensity" and cut their effective depth in half and place them in Houston in July. I'm guessing their practices would slacken a bit. 2. It's not actually clear that super intense practices are good or necessary. There's a wide range of thought on the matter among coaches at the top of their respective sports.
I think people mean different things when they talk about intensity. There's the intensity of overtraining and working players too hard, which can very much be a bad thing and lead to injury. There's no need for anyone to replicate that for the sake of it. And then there's the intensity by which everyone on the team takes every practice session, rep, etc which is what I think people are referring to. I think there is a learning curve/improvement that comes from making that move. Look at Matt Turner before and after the Arsenal move however. I think that MLS is also at the level now where that pressure/intensity, but guys are in a position that rising to that level is very feasible/doable. They aren't starting from super far behind or at a super low level or anything.
From my experience, which is from the late '90s, part of the increased intensity in training in Europe is the lack of viable career alternatives for a lot of the players. Most of the guys who were good enough to come up through pro academies and at least get the reserves either weren't very good at academics or didn't care about academics, so for them, it was either make it as a pro soccer player or go into some fairly unglamorous blue-collar profession. Whereas for me, I figured that if I didn't make it as a pro player, I could always get a college scholarship and make my way into some reasonably comfortable white-collar career, which I did. The one guy who drove me to training during my trial back in the day said he was giving it another year to make the first team, and if he didn't, he would go work as a baker. And I played in college with a guy who came up through the Man U academy but didn't get a pro deal. He took the college scholarship that our coach offered but was totally unsuited for the academic side of things and flunked out after a year. The last anyone heard from him, he had knocked up a girl at 21 and was working as a bricklayer back in England. Not that there's anything wrong with being a baker or a bricklayer, but it's bigger discrepancy financially than being an engineer, lawyer, doctor, programmer, etc. as your fallback career.
I think it varies by player and team Nearly every player has something to learn, but not every coaching staff or team is going to teach it. Turner is being asked by Arteta to develop this and it's working -- Arena did not want to play that way. But Tyler Adams walked into Leipzig and was perfectly ready to play Red Bull. He didn't have the passing chops as Leipzig evolved, but they also didn't teach them (or him learn it). The practice intensity thing is all a part of the magic Europe pixie dust thing, which becomes all encompassing. I think these things are far more variable than absolute, and that is part of what I am reacting to. The other is the overfocus on practice intensity or competition as a driver of improvement. Actual coaching, player work ethic, different motivations all factor in. There's a weird thinking in the fanbase that basically says that the only thing needed for improvement is to simply play at the highest level possible and you will improve, or that the only motivation is fighting for your spot. I think clearly you need to keep leveling up competition, but the rest of it is a far more nuanced discussion. And I'd argue most of the great players out there don't actually need external motivation. I hope Djordje is getting better competition, but I don't know how much better it is if he's playing well right out of the gate. I think the practice intensity element is probably overstated if everyone around him isn't significantly better, because if it were a really big thing, how couldn't it be?
Seattle Sounders will face Egypt’s Al Ahly Saturday at the FIFA Club World Cup. Winner meets mighty Real Madrid in the semis.— Doug McIntyre (@ByDougMcIntyre) February 1, 2023 Hopefully they at least get to the game against Real Madrid.
Another aspect that is overlooked in MLS is the player's union. They collectively bargain their CBA, which has restrictions on training. In Germany and other leagues it's not uncommon for clubs to hold 2 and even 3 training sessions a day DURING the season. There's also quite a few teams in MLS who's sole focus is the regular season. Those teams tend to not build depth like say LAFC, Philly, RBNY, Seattle, TFC, SKC, & NYCFC do. Those clubs mentioned want to win every competition, and expect to compete for everything. Not to mention the playing styles of RBNY and Philly demand depth in order to be consistently successful. Then again a large number of teams in the league still don't have defined playing styles, and plans for building a roster properly.
MLS valuations keeps soaring. I think some folks massively underestimate MLS' place in the world soccer market. Los Angeles FC is the first MLS club to reach a $1 billion valuation, according to Forbes.LA FC 2022 FinancialsRevenue: $116 millionOperating Income: $8 millionThis makes them more valuable than 14 of the 20 Premier League clubs, including West Ham, Everton & Aston villa. pic.twitter.com/DP1ZdcQdSM— Joe Pompliano (@JoePompliano) February 2, 2023
I think what that just primarily means is that the US has the most billionaires in the world by far (not a good thing), and they'd prefer to have their play things close to where they live + have most influence on policies. I'm sure Saudi and Qatari FC have exponentially out-sized market valuations for the same reasons. Their oil barons would pay hundreds of millions to billions for the most prominent clubs, just because they can. It's a seller's market.
The wealth is part of it. Team valuations are really based on being playthings of the rich now, not cash flows. The other parts of it are no threat of relegation; the salary cap / MLS dynamics mean that they can't become a financial suck like other leagues; and the overall size of the US market and growth potential.
Now that we've touched on the cynical parts of it, I suppose it at least shows the league is actually considered stable and growing now, unlike was reasonably feared 10, even 5 years ago. It just ain't near at the level or growing to the point to them being equivalent to the EPL, outside the big 6. That's artificially inflated. When something is too good to be true, it in all likelihood isn't in a real sense.
Indeed. People complain about the lack of pro/rel and the single-entity model all the time. But MLS franchises are in good shape financially post-pandemic due partly to the structure of the league. Most American fans pay attention to the Premier League, and that skews their perception of world soccer. In much of the rest of Europe, many clubs are in precarious financial straights. La Liga and Ligue 1 clubs aren't healthy right now. You see Sevilla and Valencia in the relegation battle, and think relegation could be a death sentence. Germany too. Schalke and company.
I mean, valuation isn't team quality and there's no real reason to use it as a proxy. I'm not just aiming this at you or anyone here; I think the tweets and such always sort of imply it. I'm not sure why I care about the asset value as a fan. And sports team valuation has had nothing to do with operating cash flows really, for a long, long time. I'd also put out that many of these are terribly done and incorrect. Forbes in particular was always laughable bad. That said, I'm not shocked that teams can be valued more than a lower end EPL team. Their revenue is entirely dependent on being in the EPL -- and as more and more EPL teams get snagged up by big time money that will buy their way out of relegation, the other teams become riskier and riskier investments. There's upside there, but downside as well. Blackpool was once a very good EPL club. Sunderland was a big club, or bigger than quite a few of these EPL teams. What is Watford (population 100,000) really worth? How long can they keep it up? Even if MLS had a more European structure, they'd be one of the "bigger" teams in MLS, I'd think, and so would be immune to that kind of thing like Manchester United, etc. I'm not sure LAFC goes for a billion ... but I'm actually not sure it doesn't.
Shrug. If you compare MLS financially to the Premier League............its a loser. Compare it to any other league in the world, and its doing just fine. Compare the revenue and profit in that LAFC tweet above to any club in Ligue 1 not named PSG.................. There's a reason that MLS sits so high up in terms of global transfer spending by league.
Based on the results of European competition, average salaries are reasonable proxies for league quality. MLS is top-10, in such regards. The 30th team in MLS will need to pay an expansion fee of $325 million. It's reasonable that the teams would then have the high valuations.
I don't take Forbes very seriously, but that would set a base price for an MLS team. As a comparison, the rumored price for Fiorentina is $350 million (I don't know if it includes the stadium) so MLS is very comparable to Serie A.
Seattle played Wolfsberger AC in their pre Club World Cup friendly last Saturday which ended 0-0. Wolfsberger is currently 9th in the Austrian BL. Seattle played their first choice lineup. Wolfsberger has an interesting US connection, Maurice Malone 22yo, is a German American (has a German U21 cap) striker on loan from Augsburg. Malone has 4Gs and 3As in 10 matches for Wolfsberger. He is #77 in the highlights and no I am not saying he deserves a USMNTcallup. Roldan with a nice spin/turn/pass sequence! The best of today's match against Wolfsberger AC 🎥 pic.twitter.com/bYss2U7SdE— Seattle Sounders FC (@SoundersFC) January 29, 2023
I don’t think results in a preseason game like that mean anything about the relative quality of the teams/leagues. It’s kind of like the old mls all star games, where the all stars would play an EPL team close and people would try to read something into the quality of mls.
In Italy, outside of Juve and Udinese, clubs don't own their stadiums. The laws in Italy were against that for decades. It's very slowly starting change. As far as MLS valuations go: most teams own their stadiums, training facilities, and youth academies. When you factor in LAFC's stadium being in downtown LA....a high valuation makes some sense. Now, when NYCFC finally get their stadium built.......I suspect that they'll be the highest valued team in MLS. I'm also surprised TFC isn't higher up the list.
Forbes claim the value of the stadium isn't included, but that makes it even weirder. It's tough to really value sports teams these days because the pricing isn't based entirely on tangible aspects.