I hear allt he time on big soccer radio that MLS is so far behind the rest of the world especially Europe. My question is: Is the True? and How is it true? How is the game different? IS it that much better? I have never seen an over seas match; I do plan to watch and championship match coming up in I think 2 weeks.
I wouldn't say far behind. MLS is better than many leagues in Europe smaller countries and is better than some leagues in south and central america. MLS is slower than England for obvious reasons. We play in the hot summer. England plays a lot in the winter. They HAVE to run around a lot to an extent to keep warm so they have a faster paced game. I am really glad that MLS does not try to emulate England. I would like the league to try to play a more possesion type style since this is the way most national teams play in big tournaments. And it would be better for our player development as well. MLS has always had players who had the quality to play overseas. But we have even more of these players now and will have even more of these players in the future primarily because of the existence of MLs. The major difference between MLS an many superior leagues is depth and the way that depth affects player development. I don't just mean the big euro leagues like England Spain Germany Italy Holland and Portugal. In many superior leagues there is a surplus of talent with much bigger squads in comparison to MLS. These teams have bigger budgets so the can afford more talent. This surplus of talent creates a competitive atmosphere whereby a player is essential fighting for his job every week based on how he performs in training. This competition is good for players because it keeps them sharp or forces them to perform at their best more of the time which really aids in development. MLS has none of these things (yet) and as a result while we can develop talented players like Landon Donovan and Clint Mathis and Carlos Bocanegra. Those players will benefit greatly from such a competitive atmosphere. In America player like Clint and Landon know they are among the best and though they are not lazy they may never be pushed to the heights they can reach until they are exposed to this competitive environment. This is what they can find in europe. Now many will tell you that american players need to be in europe at a young age because they know how to develop talent. HOGWASH! For the most part europe knows how to buy talent. A lot of the best South Americans play in europe because the wages are better an dthe teams are run more profesionally. These wonderful players go to europe and raise the level of the game immensely. Europe has good facilities for nurturing talent but a large percentage of the 'quality' in europe is provided by the south americans. This is at the heart of the problem in America we need to creat an environment in which ours best players are challenged every day for playing time because this will lead to faster palyer development as well as the production of more players of high quality. That does mean we need to go out and buy a bunch of south americans
I don`t agree that completely. Ok the Mls club's don't have they same power of the first ten clubs in Germany Spain or England eg. But vs. the smaller teams in England or especially Spain and Italy, the MLS teams are better. I don't say Germany, cause the BuLi is from the 1st till 18st not so different. A lot of MLS Teams (exclude Dallas, Columbus etc.) would survive european leagues. Not as champion, but survive. The clubs I mean are San Jose, LA, KC, Colorado and New England. Cause they play soccer in the style, when you can't win, dont lose it. The MLS quality in performace and intelligent play is still growing. More the in South America. See the results of the US National team. And I see every week in the BuLi and 2nd BuLi how the US players getting stronger and stronger.
For the purpose of this argument when I say MLS's best I mean the top two. The league is equivalent to the teams in 4th-8th place in the english divison one. They would struggle mightily in EPL and La Liga simply because of the depth those teams have to deploy over a long season. Even the worst EPL teams are damn fine squads when we speak in realtive terms and are much better equpped to deal with long season. EPL and La Liga are quality top to bottom even the bad teams. Serie A is different. Despite the reputation of the league in the minds of many the top MLS would survive relegation from Serie A. The chasm between the top teams and the bottom teams is too large and there are some truly horrific sides in that league. Its almost as if they are two leagues. Top six and bottom twelve. Germany is interesting. There are many underachieving teams in Germany that display quality better than MLS so it would be hard to judge. I say the best teams in MLS have 25% chance of surviving relegation. France is a very underated league and there are some very good teams there (not just the champions league teams we see so much from) that are doing amazing things with very small budgets. It is the cradle of African football and there are literally dozens of players with African nationality that benefit from growing up under the well run French youth systems. MLS teams would have an even chance of surviving but they would have to play at their very best almost all the time against hungry footballers that are trying very hard to make their mark in the eyes of scouts from bigger leagues. Holland has a good league but many of the teams are simply average and I am not at all impressed by the quality outside of the traditional big three. MLS's best would stand a very good chance of staying up. Despite the percieved quality differential between MLS and the tops league abroad I will still be watching every game I can get my hands on (thank you yahoo). What I am most optimistic about is that teh quality of the keeps growing by leaps and bounds each year even though we have less and less of the big name foreigners who provide much of the quality in the early years. We are producing much better players. And hopefully the rate of improvement will continue.
These are results to the Concacaf Champions Cup over the 2002, 2003, and so far 2004(the years they started playing over two legs): 2002 Round of 16(Home team listed first) Comunicaciones(Guatemala) vs DC United 4-0, 1-2 Olimpia(Honduras) vs San Jose Earthquakes 0-1, 1-3 Municipal(Guatemala) vs Chicago Fire 0-1, 0-2 W Connection(T&T) vs KC Wizards 0-1, 0-2 Quaterfinals Pachuca(Mexico) vs SJ Earthquakes 3-0, 0-1 Morelia(Mexico) vs Chicago Fire 2-0, 1-2 Santos Laguna(Mexico) vs KC Wizards 2-1, 2-0 Semi-Finals Morelia(Mexico) vs KC Wizards 6-1, 1-1 2003 Round of 16 Municipal vs SJ Earthquakes 4-2, 2-1 Alajuelensue(Costa Rica) vs NE Revolution 4-0, 1-3 Dep Arabe Unido(Panama) vs Colombus Crew 2-1, 0-3 Motagua(Honduras) vs LA Galaxy 2-2, 0-1 Quarter-Finals Morelia vs Colombus Crew 6-0, 0-2 LA Galaxy vs Necaxa(Mexico) 1-4, 1-2 2004 QuaterFinals Alajuelensue vs SJ Earthquakes 3-0, 0-1 San Juan Jabloteh vs Chicago Fire 5-2, 4-0 These are the results from the Copa Merconorte that KC and NY/NJ played in 2001: Group B record GF-GA Pts 1. Millionarios(Colombia) 4-0-2 10-7 12 2. Dep. Italchacao(Venezuela) 4-0-2 9-8 12 3. NY/NJ Metrostars 3-0-3 8-5 9 4. Chivas(dropped out of torney) Group C 1. Santos(Mexico) 5-0-1 15-6 15 2. Sporting Crystal(Peru) 3-2-1 10-10 11 3. Kansas City Wizards 1-1-4 8-12 4 4. Barcelona(Ecuador) 0-3-3 9-14 3
MLS does badly as soon as its teams have to play a lot of games. No MLS team ever has more than 25 players under contract at any given time, and most have only two goalkeepers. If you tell any European manager, even one not involved in any international competitions, to go through a season on 25 players, you'll probably get an answer along the lines of "Are you crazy?!?!"