http://sports.yahoo.com/mls/news;_y...wN0aA--?slug=ap-mls-rosters&prov=ap&type=lgns haven't seen this elsewhere
Correct me if I'm wrong, but Chivas USA can now have nine Mexican citizens on the field if they want. Personally I have nothing wrong with that, but I can definently see the majority of the BigSoccer community condenming it. As for Real Salt Lake, are they even looking at signing nine international players? I would figure they would try to get a few US Nat veterans in the expansion draft and then build the team up from the college ranks. It would be cheaper that way. Then again, that Real Madrid connection could be legit and they could be sending some young talent their way. Otherwise, the nine international thing has to be a Chivas hookup.
...And so after all this time theorizing if and how Chivas-USA will employ their racist ambitions on the field, it turns out I, among others, were right about their agenda. "Transitional international" players. It's almost laugheable. It's almost like they think most of us are dumb. (I know some people here are indeed, the ones that continue to defend this deceitful imitation team.)
This has been continually reported in the Spanish-language press for a long, long time. It appears unlikely, however, that their foreigners will all be Mexican. Joselito Vaca has been approached by Chivas USA, and according to Radio Columbia in Costa Rica, Saprissa officials are in meetings today about sending some players. Saprissa -- Vergara's other team -- is where MLS got Guevara and Cancela. They now have a couple of Costa Rican national team playmakers in Alonso Solís and Walter Centeno, as well as a young forward named Alvaro Saborío who's been tearing up their league. At the very least, I'd expect Saborío (as a TI) to play with Chivas next year.
Good. With Moreno getting his greed card, and Herzog and Bo retiring, that means the Galaxy can completely stock up on quality INTL players. They won't, but I'm just saying. . . .
But will RSL be able to use it? Not that this is any real advantage anyway. Will more Erick Scotts, Boucicauts, Brillants, etc make that big a difference. It's still the same cap. The big issue will be if Vergara can "loan" players from Chivas and Saprissa a la the Ruiz deal to avoid the cap. It's time for CONCACAF internationals to get their resumees ready. This year 3*10 + 20 = 50 spots max. Next year 4*12 +3*10+5*2=88 spots max. Plus you gotta think some guys won't be back (Howey, maybe SGR). I'm not sure teams will fill these spots since they're not maxed out now. With 4 * 10 +28*2, there will be 96 more spots in total in MLS. That's 58 more than the increase in international spots, so it's not like the Americans will all be out of work. I like it. I hope this league will be THE place to be for young CONCACAF talent and will help to improve the region.
that's salt lake's decision... what matters is they are being given the exact same treatment just shut the ******** up about the league bending over for chivas... cause it ain't happening
This may have been a little unwarranted. It's not really RSL's decision not to have a feeder team located in Costa Rica, and a team that's willing to loan out players to it in Mexico. They're playing by the same rules, but the rules were made to be far more advantageous to Chivas than to RSL. That being said, this isn't really a big deal.
Over the past six years, John Ellinger has attended hundreds of youth international games and met an awful lot of coaches. At the press conference to announce his hiring, he mentioned his excitement about bringing in some of the young players his teams have faced. Both of the incoming teams are intent on using their connections abroad.
Yeah, but they have a really good feeder team in Madrid, Spain. That's where the name comes from, right?
Gazidis discusses expansion, future By**Jason Halpin**/**MLSnet.com Staff http://www.mlsnet.com/MLS/news/mls_news.jsp?ymd=20041114&content_id=19050&vkey=news_mls&fext=.jsp O.k., take a look at the following, and see if I'm the only one confused: "...Roster sizes will change in three key areas in 2005. Overall rosters will expand from 24 to 28, and the number of international players allowed per team will also increase. The rule that holds the number of transitional internationals to 20 league-wide, while not restricting the number of such players on each team, will cease to exist. Instead, teams will be held to three transitional internationals, and the limit on senior internationals will increase from three to four. Those transitional international spots are eligible to be traded among teams..." O.k, if each MLS club has limits to the number of T.I. slots they're allowed: 5 for Chivas and RSL, and 3 for everyone else, then how can these T.I. slots be traded? For example: if New England wanted to trade one of their T.I. slots, say to Chivas for a high draft pick for example, how could Chivas be granted an additional T.I. slot when the league says they can only have five? Unless... unless a club can add an additional T.I. slot through a trade. If that's the case, then a club like Chivas could significantly expand their international roster. What am I missing here? The Magpie
sounds like the slots can be traded. Chivas could sign the U-23 Mexican national team if the want. and MLS isn't "bending" the rules at all, don't believe that for a second. but I don't have a problem with it. there's more T-I talent out there that'll improve MLS. it won't come at the cost of US players being developed. any limitations Chivas puts on themselves will only hinder their success. there'll probably be a few white guys on Chivas anyway if not quite a few. as long as they have equal chance to earn playing time, I have no problem.
So they'll be an all Hispanic team instead of just an all Mexican team. I really don't have a problem with this in theory, but I have a huge problem with the double standard that is at work here. We all know that if Lazio or Barca or Rangers or whatever European club tried to do something comparable to what Chivas has done with MLS and stated that all their SI's had to be Europeans and that they were going to actively court White American players the uproar would be massive. But i'm beating a dead horse here. As for the increase it is ultimately a good thing for the league. Now if only we could get that salary cap raised so that the league could bring in some star internationals that'd put more fans in the stands.
I think the bigger idea here is that Chivas needs to be successful. A team comprised largely of U-23 players won't win in MLS. Look at DCU a few years ago. The league is too good for that right now. Competition will make Chivas field the best available players and that means a team with quite a few mid to late 20's americans.
Or if Atletico de Bilbao stated that all their players had to be of Basque origin... I prefer it this way. If MLS is going to be increasing the number of internationls, at least make sure they have to be reasonable. The less they can pay them, the less likely we'll see another Sergio Galvan Rey.
Judging by their actions so far, this isn't true at all. Chivas-USA's first prominent hiring was their GM, a white American named Whit Haskell. Their head coach is a Dutchman named Thomas Rongen. Rongen has indicated that he will be free to make his own player selections. This is a team designed to appeal to the hispanic market segment, but that idea is no more controversial than, for example, BET.
also the change is TI's are "less than 24". Currently they're in practice less than 25 for the entire season. Not sure it that means 24 y/o's will be SI's next year. I'd guess not, but technically it sounds like an announcement that such a change will take place.
Wow ... as you say, that creates a massive loophole for a team to be foreign-driven. Even so, it does seem like an improvement over the current arrangement, where the Metros sign a bunch of TI's and a team like San José doesn't get any. The tradeability situation also means that it's still easiest to think about a league-wide limit on TI's -- it will grow to 40 next season. Do you happen to know how that number has evolved over time?