They don't dominate in the sense of say a Madrid and Barca. The last 6 half seasons have had 6 different champions.
The advantages of a Canamex SL: to fans: - higher level of competition - higher spending at top teams - possibility of pro/rel - more attractive to world-class players - more places to travel - US based Liga MX fans get to see their teams to owners: - bigger TV audiences = more cash - growth in Mexican team valuations
Despite a comparative lack of titles, Spurs always had a large fanbase, and when the phrase "big 5" first came around in the 80s, it was based on TV ratings. Certainly, back then, Arsenal and Spurs were the big two in London, with little between them. Chelsea didn't catch up in the 'big club' stakes until the late 90s at the earliest.
Sure, and I left out Cruz Azul and Tigres. It’s a little hard to compare Liga MX to European leagues because of the short schedule and playoffs: the algebra is just different, but MLS would definitely be opening the door to and inviting in superclubs and if every season just ends up like CCL, I’m not sure the average American fan will see much of a difference.
Mexican clubs are not inherently better. They don't have to operate under the strict roster regulations that affect MLS. Obviously in a combined league all teams would operate with identical budget and roster regulations. Also all teams would start on the same date. Today MLS teams play the first round pre-season while the Mexican clubs are in full swing.
I'd invite ten of Club America, Chivas, Tigres UANL, Monterrey, Cruz Azul, Santos Laguna Tijuana, Veracruz, Pachuca, UNAM and Club Leon.
Hold on, why relegate Necaxa to second division? Their owners won't tolerate that. Like I said to @Expansion Franchise, a league merger won't consist three or ten Liga MX clubs to the fold. It would be a 50-60 team merger, depending if MLS reaches to 30-32 teams + add the remaining Liga MX teams.
I don’t know what Liga MX teams would or wouldn’t agree to, but it would have to be all or nothing for MLS teams. And I don’t see MLS owners agreeing to pro/rel.
Every current Liga MX and MLS team would be included in the league structure, with promotion and relegation. That's 48 teams total. The second division would be split into regional conferences. Additional teams could be added via expansion. This is the thing about Liga MX, it's not dominated by 2 or 3 clubs like most European leagues. I'm sure there are some businessmen in Veracruz who would like to play. Admittedly America have only finished outside the top 4 once since Liga MX was born.
I'd envision MLS2.0 getting in due to numbers and weather - sea,por,lag,lafc,fca,ncfc,imfc,cfc,nsc. Interesting to see whic orange team they take, houston due to weather, or derfussballklub for the attendance. Probably also take Dallas. The rest are the US 2nd division. rapids, spurting, dcu, union, revs, sje, minu, the team charted by the king of utah, etc. Not sure how it shakes out for the NYs and Canadians.... There'd probbly be some sort of pro/rel - drag our numbers down and we'll replace you with someone else. i could also see layered entry like your average $300million bid gets you into MLS classic, but if you can bring 7-900 million you get to sit at the grownup table.
Kinda like the Old Etonians, just a bad century or so. All hail the North American Super League even under some MLS rules. Unless they start charging MLS beer prices, then i'm out!
People moan about the beer prices at UK sports venues, but in the US it's ridiculous, from $8 for an American beer to $12 for something drinkable.
If this were given the green light .... the purse strings would be cut. ZERO way the dudes in charge (owners) go into this with what they know is a huge handicap on the literal playing field. For years a few of us had bandied about a 10-15m$ cap WITH the DP/et al other exemptions as being a level in which MLS would just about explode. If MLS/LIGAMX merged, I'd be willing to bet that would be the MINIMUM level as it would put us on par with most MX clubs. Gignac is the highest paid single player and we've got a small handful paid higher than him. Also, our upper end clubs are already paying more than maybe the top one or two clubs in MX. It wouldn't be about the spending, but rather how it's spent. All team valuations involved would immediately jump. Reminding that this type of thing has already been exempted in sport and gives the owners a bullet to fire? If you're in TX you won't pay 8$ for a Shiner, and it's wonderful.
Lessons from the ESL disaster to be learned by the rugby clubs: https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2...ble-lessons-from-european-super-league-fiasco Financial muscle is not the only indicator for success and the sport must avoid the mistakes made by football’s biggest clubs
Paid $12 for a 16 ounce Tecate a few years ago at a Galaxy Game. Down in Tijuas paid 80 pesos ($4) for a 24 ounce bud. And I've been told Xolos have the most expensive beers in the league. Actually the better deal is the baseball team. On midweek games before the first pitch it's 20 pesos ($1) for 24 ounce beers. Dangerous!
Tecate isn't really any different than Bud. Just a couple of flavorless macro-brewed beers. The idea that knowledgeable American beer drinkers are paying a premium for something like Tecate or Heineken is pretty funny.
Yeah agree they are both essentially the same although if all things are equal I prefer Tecate. Weirdly you can't get it at Xolos because they are sponsored by Inbev now, which is ironic considering the original Tecate brewery is only about 20 miles away. Is it a state Law that if you live in Texas you have to like Shiner?
Sounds good, but I have no idea what a 24 oz beer is. Don't you also measure things in cups? What size is a cup? A mug? A tea cup? A DD cup? Then again, in the UK we invented the duvet Tog rating, which nobody understands...