After lots of talk about how much expansion MLS could handle based upon the depth of the player pool we now have real experience. I'm wondering how people feel now. I feel optimistic that from a player perspective, 16 teams by 2008 is very viable.
I think the *talent* is there. Remember, guys like Chris Carrieri and Ezra Hendrickson ended up in the A-League. DC couldn't even keep Doug Warren as a cheap backup. But it'll take time for teams to gel as a unit (not everyone can be the '98 Fire.) So IMO, we can add two teams in 2007, and probably 2 in 2009, esp. with the new reserve teams. At that point, MLS might need to take a breather.
and more starting roles allows for new stars to be born remember... guys just need a chance... without enough starting roles, they don't get that chance... now there will be more chances for that to happen... which is ideal for us
I totally agree with him^. Look at guys like Brian Ching, Davy Arnaud, and Henry Ring. The talent wont be dilluted, we need more starting spots.
A couple of things: First, I would really like to see free agency for players. When there are out of a contract its MLS or the highway. Second, points about players like Carrieri are right on. Third, the young talent coming up is simply amazing. I'm really hopeful this won't just continue, but accelerate. I can't wait for players like Eddie Gaven and Freddy Adu to be in their mid-twenties in MLS (okay, that's nothing but a fantasy).
Well, the talent will be diluted to some extent, at least temporarily, but what a lot of people don't understand is that this is what MLS needs right now. At this point there isn't enough difference between a really good MLS player and a really bad one, which is one reason so many teams hover around .500. Talent is measured on a relative basis, and if there aren't enough bad players, there won't be enough good ones. In a short time, the talent level will catch up to the number of roster spots available. In 1996, there clearly weren't enough good American players to fill even ten teams. Now there are enough to fill...well, more than ten anyway. The same thing will happen when they expand to twelve teams, and beyond. This process can't continue indefinitely, of course, but it seems clear that they don't have enough teams now. Ultimately, more teams will mean a stronger league, both on the basis of entertainment value and as compared to top European leagues. In the meantime we'll see some guys who aren't up to the challenge, but in the long run we'll be happy we paid that price.
I gotta agree with Tom here. The level of talent will rise in a stair case until one of two things happen. 1st the level gets so high that it can't be raised or 2nd there are no more open spots for players to play. In that case you will see something similar to this year in which the better players will move to europe and make room for new stars to be born.
I actually think the tallent difference in MLS is spectacularly large. Eddie Pope is a premership quality guy playing alongside Kenny Arena who belongs in the 4th division. But, I still think we can expand, because the number of young quality players is increasing, plus there are so many players that can be brought in from outside the USA.
I think there is a much larger talent pool out there than there are MLS roster spots. They just need a chance to play the game at a high level every day with teammates of the same level. Look at the improvements made since the inception of the league. I think that's just evidence that when given the oportunity to be full-time professionals with full-time pro coaches and other pro players, the talent can blossom. College soccer doesn't provide that, but I think the talent is there. It just can't develop very quickly while in college. There have been tons of impact MLS players who came out of college. They don't adjust real quickly because college hasn't prepared them for the level of MLS. But they have the talent and with time they get over it. Eskandarian's a great example. In other words, expansion will give more oportunities to talented players who need to develop the speed of play needed in MLS. Also, more oportunities means less guys fall through the cracks. MLS talent scouts can't always be right, and probably often pass up on good players in favor of lesser ones. This is natural. But expansion would make this less common. It might dilute the pool for a short while but long term it is very good for the level of play of the league.
The sooner MLS lessens its dependence on college soccer the better. Some of these college players are 23 by the time they enter MLS.
I agree MLS shouldn't be dependent on college, and I think they are making strides toward that with P-40, reserve teams etc.. But college is a valuable thing to US soccer, something that in the future could put the US above all. It is a safety net. It's hard to tell when a player is 17 or 18 whether or not he will actually pan out. A lot of guys have and just as many if not more haven't. If MLS becomes too dependent on picking up 18 year olds, they'll miss out on a lot of talent. College provides a place for players to go and keep playing. Although they don't develop a whole lot, it doesn't really hurt them. It's just sort of a 4 year delay. Obviously we want the best players as soon as possible. But guessing at age 18 is pretty tricky, even for countries like Brazil and Italy. Since we don't have a solid "minor-league" system here, with abundunt playing oportunities and a willingness to build up young players, college is the next best thing. The PDL is outstanding but it needs to be bigger, and the economics don't allow that. With "minor-league" teams world-wide and in the US struggling, college may prove to be invaluable to US soccer.
I also bet the average college soccer player gets a higher quality education than basketball or football players.
Good point ... in MLS, there is parity among teams, not parity among individual players. Agreed again. Let's look at it from the perspective of a typical existing club. Cost of 2005 Expansion and Other Changes -- Two back-up players lost to expansion draft -- slightly lower draft picks Benefits of 2005 Expansion and Other Changes -- higher salary cap (don't know by how much) -- four additional roster places (two senior, two development) -- one additional SI -- one additional TI -- reserve games to assist in development. The Net Result (More or Less): You lose a couple of reserves and get an extra SI and TI to replace them. With decent scouting, that should be a positive trade-off.
No. I am saying that the best US players are the one who develop within the MLS system rather than through college. College does produce some good players but many of those leave early like Dempsey and Wolff or graduate at 21 like Claudio Reyna. Most of the best young U.S players like Donovan, Beasley, Gaven and Onyewu did not develop in college soccer. My bigger problem with the college system is that many of the current seniors are graduating at 23 or even 24. If you are that age when you turn pro; you are at a big disadvantage compared to a Beasley, Donovan or Dempsey.
Should be an interesting draft, because with the expanded rosters I would imagine that for once, most draft picks will make the final roster. Hopefully there's a deep pool of talent this year. It will be the opposite of 2002, where a lot of rookies didn't get much of a chance following contraction.
Thank you. And that is the maion reason why players like Bobby Convey don't improve. They know they will be on the field so why push yourself. Now he is in a real competitive environment and he is struggling. People need to understand that there is a difference between servicable pros and talented pros. MLS is full of the former but not the latter. People confuse the two and think the presence of the former is a sign of a talent surplus. It is not. The Talent will be diluted. And we will be seeing a lot more clumsy soccer and embarassing goals.
Do you realise that the reason these guys transition so well to MLS is because the talent level of the league has regressed closer to the college game?
Do you have a business model Rommul, no, well then how to go about fixing it? MLS should only play the very best players in the world and leave out all those crappy college guys. We should entirely change American culture in one ********ing day starting at the lowest youth level to focus at developing talent for MLS. Rommul is very goal oriented but he offers no answers and completely ignores the process. MLS pays no money to develop youth players because today it doesn't make financial sense to. If Damarcus is worth only 3 million dollars why pay to setup an academy to develop one Damarcus every five years and a bunch of other decent players when your league is already losing money? When MLS turns a league wide profit they should invest in youth player development. As Chicago, Colorado, SLC, DC, Metro, and SJ move to their own stadiums the league will turn a profit fairly quickly, I say within a year of opening most of these stadiums, and youth setups will pop up. Right now MLS has Bradenton to develop those top players who they will sell to Europe and College to discover those players who can fill the roster.
For a minute there I thought you were talking about Stefanovic's botched attempt at defending Wright-Phillips yesterday, which gave Man City their first goal. Because that was both clumsy and embarrassing to the nth degree. Clumsy soccer and embarrassing goals happen at every level. I've seen more disastrous screw-ups in the vaunted leagues of Europe than I care to count, whether it's Enckelman's disaster against Birmingham City or a Serie A defender (I can't remember who, it was a few years ago), who stretched to cut off a pass 35 yards from goal, and in the process hit the loveliest chipped own goal you'll ever see. It happens everywhere. To pretend that botched plays and bad goals happen only in MLS and never in The Great Leagues Of The World is to see only what you want to see.
This is one of those easy cliches that, well, really isn't right. For one thing, you can't use Kenny Arena, and the yawning gap between him and Convey, to make this point. DC actually had some quality depth in the midfield, and Convey was still Convey this year. Besides, to me, it's OBVIOUS that MLSers are under MORE professional pressure than overseas players. Why? No matter how bad Convey f's up in Reading, he's gonna get paid. An overpaid MLSer, a guy whose productivity doesn't justify his cap number, he gets cut. He's out scrounging for regular work. THAT'S pressure. There are alot of cliches that Eurosnobs repeat without really understanding MLS. But if you stop and think about them logically, many, many of them fall apart. This is one. The lack of "pressure" that allows your Conveys and Mathis' to coast, IMO, is more likely the lack of media attention. It's not pressure from subs pushing to take their starting position.