mls needs to squeeze the marketing/playing potential of its young stars as much as possible. i can't believe some people actually want mls to sell its great stars, some say Adu and other mls stars should go to europe to "help the USA national team and improve it" THE NATIONAL TEAM DOESNT NEED EUROPE TO BE GOOD DAMMIT! as proven by the all mls side that has played a few games recently. The USMNT is like the Mexican nt in the way that they have enough good players on their domestic league to qualify for the world cup and do well (proven by usa and mexico in last world cup, for mexico it has always done well with mostly domestic players). It also helps that the USA is in a weak confederation so it doesn't have to worry about qualifying (it is almost a given, automatic even if you don't want to admit it) it should be a policy not to sell any of our young stars before the age of 24. Donovan, Beasley, Convey, Howard, they can all wait a little longer! Mls needs to squeeze the reputation as much as possible! what player will you get to replace Donovan? a guy that has been on late night talk shows and is one of the few players a non-soccer fan can regonize? how can you sell Adu with all the publicity his growing reputation has been getting in newspaper and media?? the "RECOGNIZABLE" players leaving mls is bad! not the average players. The only way for mls to grow in popularity and on a sporting level is for it to keep its young stars (beasley, donovan etc) because they are the RECOGNIZABLE PLAYERS! THE STARS! if the revs sold twellman, or chicago sold beasley would there be a reason to watch those teams? it would kill the teams! most mls teams do not have enough recognizable talents per team to be interesting to watch. SELL THE NON-STARS mls doesn't have much money so selling the non-stars is good for the league. Guys like Wade Warret, Joe Cannon among others who werent USMNT material and never played much for it should be sold.
And why have Mexico, who do have tons of talent, gotten to the quarters a total of TWO times, once while at home, despite being a one sport nation? That's right, because their players don't play the best. If their top players would just go to any of the best leagues, like I'm sure some of them could, then they would be a ton better. You're right, our MLSers played great against people that play in the best leagues. But what happens if we sell those certain players to those leagues? A) MLS makes money and B) It opens up spots for other, sometimes just as talented Americans to get a chance to play. Look at Dunivant. He got a chance to shine and is doing well for SJ because the guy in front of him got sold.
If MLS solely makes money on the transfer market, then America really has no business producing soccer within its own borders. People, seriously, repeat after me: think about the fans. The only people that really matter in any enterprise in any sport.
If you are one of those that want mls to sell its stars you care more about the USMNT and not mls becoming a great league. "A) MLS makes money and B) It opens up spots for other, sometimes just as talented Americans to get a chance to play. " what would happen if mls listened to you people and sold most of its stars to make money? imagine next season without donovan, beasley, convey, howard, martino etc. Interesting season here is the problem with you and the rest of the "lets bow to europe" people. After all if you sell mls players you don't care about the league improving and became a top class league because you only care about the USMNT I AM TALKING ABOUT MAKING MLS BETTER! YOU ONLY CARE ABOUT THE USMNT! the thing is the USMNT doesn't need players in europe to be competitive, to reach the world cup and do well. mls will only improve if the young stars stay with the league. Yes mls has lots of young talent but I don't think every team has a player on the bench ready to replace the donovan and beasleys. mls makes money: yes mls might make money but at what price? selling donovan? beasley? the best and most recognizable players mls has? I don't think so.
See, I think you have me confused with a Eurosnob. I think that selling players slowly, maybe one, two or three a year, is good for the league, and soccer in America in general. I don't want MLS to see all of it's stars. Far from it.
Read what this guy has to say. He makes a great point: https://www.bigsoccer.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=1124368#post1124368 https://www.bigsoccer.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=1124393#post1124393 Maybe not. Maybe he's just too lazy to type the same things over again.
the us cannot continue to improve at the rate it is without players leaving... we don't have enough slots as it is here the best should move on... that's how it goes the world over (outside of mexico) incest is incest no matter how you say it... and it's always bad
I think the players who want to play in Europe for Money the MLS can't stop them and won't stop them.
If they want to go, let them go, but only after fighting to keep them here. If they're dead set on going, they're not going to do much for the club for which they currently play. But the reason should never be "the best should play the best, period end of sentence." That's just an insult to the fans (and I don't mind saying that over and over, because they are all who matter in any sport). And I sincerely don't give a damn what the rest of the world does; we do pretty well doing things our own way, and if that bothers some people, well TOUGH!
Theres two sides here. Some might care more about the USMNT than MLS. I've got to say though, that a majority probably care about both the same. Yes, as skipshady pointed out, we shouldnt gut the league of every decent player and sell them off. At the same time, is MLS making money? NO. If MLS sold Howard for $2 million, that covers the salary of a whole MLS team (save the ones that get to cheat the cap ). If they can drive the price up for Howard, they could start to pay a whole other team's salary. Yes, when the stars are in the states it brings more attendance. But keep in mind how these players became stars. They were great high school aged players, played in the youth nats camps and them came to MLS and got a chance to play immediatelly. The longer some of these players stay in the league, the longer the next couple of generations have to set on the bench and wait. While they could be developing in real games every week. Its a catch 22 the way I see it. But you look back and think of the transfers MLS refused ($2 million for Ben Olsen comes to mind) and realize theres some money we could have gotten out of a player who we're still waiting to become a star. Just my $.02.
someone mentioned : in order to be the best have to play against the best, well, this is true i think, they play against the best here every week during MLS season, so they don't need to go abroad to be the best, fair 'nuf ?
You - and Sybing - are insane. Look, if a player wants to go overseas - sell him! It's downright stupid to refuse to sell a player who has made it clear he wants to move abroad at the end of his contract. By selling him MLS gets something for nothing (and the chicks are free). Then there are players like McBride, and Donovan. Probably the two best strikers in the league, and they don't want to go overseas. OK, no problem. I hate to break it to you guys, but the players do have a say in their own employement, salaries are higher in Europe, and MLS doesn't have the money to be financially competitive. That translates to selling a small number of players every so often, or letting them go for a song at the end of their contracts. Financial solvency is Job #1 for MLS, and being the best league in the world is job 2. Selling a few players who are eventually going to leave anyway helps job 1, but does nothing WRT job 2. Deal with it.
remember we reached WC quarter final with majority of MLS players ? while Argentina w/ full of serie A players couldn't even get into the 2nd ?
The USA had an amazing run in the last World Cup. Argentina had a terrible showing, as well as France. Who plays for the US is as good as Batistuta, Crespo, etc. Who plays for the US is a good as Henry, Zidane, etc. Just because these teams flopped in ONE tournament, does not mean that the USA has superior talent.
First of all, it's spelled "damnit" for some reason. Second, calm down. It is MLS's stated policy to try and retain it's premier talent. The league has never shown any interest in becoming a developmental league for big Euro clubs. Having said that, it will, obviously, lose player from time to time. Hopefully, it'll actually manage to sell those players who are intent on playing abroad, rather than just lose them as free agents.
MLS must sell some of the important players that desire to go to Europe for one main reason: REPUTATION.. If the MLS continues to set prices for players unreasonably high, 2 things will happen: 1) IT will it turn off the european clubs from dealing with the MLS in the future, assuming they are unreasonable.. This ends up hurting future business opportunities for the MLS due to burning bridges 2) More importantly, the MLS PLAYERS will get irritated (already happened with Beasley) when deals fall through and offers are ignored.. PLayers will sense the trend and skip MLS altogether, or will be apprehensive when signing longer term contracts with MLS due to fear of being stuck.. simply put, IT IS A COST OF DOING BUSINESS for the MLS to possibly accept lower prices for its players IN TEH SHORT TERM while it is getting established as a major league..
I'm not advocating the sale of the top 3 players on each MLS team to be sold to European clubs either. I think most US players should play in MLS for a period of time, while only a few who want the challenge of playing anywhere abroad should be "let go" by the league after a certain period of time. It doesn't help for Donovan to sit on a bench in Germany, but after a few more years a move back to Europe would be more beneficial to him than staying in MLS, IMO.
Nobody wants it, it is just the reality of the situation. Do I want to see an american play in the Champions League Final ? yes I do. Besides playing in a World Cup final it is the next best thing. MLS just doesn't have the money to keep our stars, I wish they could. I wish we would have one of the best leagues in the world, i wish we had 40 k average attendance, and one of the highest rated sports broadcasts on television, and i wish to win the lottery to get my own MLS team.
The MLS is still in it's infancy. Not a huge amount of fan support abroad and money trickles in at best. The league does have a fair amount of talented players and some of them have been picked up by better teams in Europe. The money brought in from this can provide the payroll for the Colorado Rapids as one gentleman posted earlier. I believe this is only temporary. If MLS is able to stick it out for the long haul then fan support will build along with great players. The MLS is no EPL or SPL for that matter. One day it will be. Perhaps having the MLS as a "farm" league for the Euro-leagues would be a good thing. Think about it....our American players would be enjoying more challenges thus providing more upsets in the World Cup and thus building that big fan base I was talking about.
There are a couple of ways to look at this. And virtually all points are valid. But some are more realistic than others. MLS is young and has little in terms of reputation. But it does contain a crop of untapped talent. That has big clubs interested. They can grow as players in MLS (at no cost to the big clubs), and some can move on....some deserve to move on and try to play on bigger stages. Some will only be MLS stars. That's fine. I don't think MLS should across the board say "no transfers of young american talent". They need to weigh the pros and cons of selling a player off. What use is it to have a young bitter american star in MLS? If he want's to go play for PSG, or something, and has the opportunity, and PSG is willing to pay a fair price, sold. It underwrites the league for further development. I've equated the present day MLS to the Dutch league. A good league that must sell of players in order to thrive. Maybe in 15-20 or 50 years, MLS can be more of a buyer. But it must improve incrementally.
And how far would the team have gotten if Brad Friedel hadn't played in the EPL, but with the Crew? Would an extra couple of seasons in MLS stopping teams like the Revs, and Mutiny been more beneficial than a Man U? Arsenal? Chelsea? Sunderand even? The majority of the roster was MLS. But the cornerstones were foreign based players. Reyna, Stewart, Lewis (OK, not Lewis)
Yeah, I know how you feel. I was incredibly mad when Hejduk, McBride, and all of the others transferred over to Europe. But do you really think Friedel was able to stop two penalties and get named to the World Cup All-Star 3rd squad facing MLS shots? He was named the Outstanding Goalkeeper in England recently. Maybe I'm biased, because I'm a goalkeeper, but the real deal is that MLS is not the greatest league yet. We're getting there, but if we want to improve on our World Cup record in Germany, we need to get our guys facing the speed and power they will see in 2006. That's the bottom line.