You can tell from the way he talks that he's very committed and eager to soak up information. Very often those qualities allow a player to max out and reach their ceiling. I am definitely a fan.
Someone from Philadelphia (Tanner?) said that both Aaronsons have unlimited ability to process information.
https://www.frontrowsoccer.com/2023...iladelphia-development-squad-to-play-in-npsl/ Another cog in the Development pathway.
So there's: Union Union II (MLSNP) MLS Next Development Squad NPSL Is this roughly the same subset of players as the MLS Next team? Lower? Higher?
Don't know exactly. My educated guess is that these are players who have outgrown MLS NXT, but aren't quite ready for MLS NextPro (Union II). It's also a good place for Academy members who are on Summer Break from College.
Highly-rated US youth international Jack McGlynn has signed a contract extension with the Philadelphia Union through 2025 with team options through 2027.McGlynn, 19, will be a crucial part of the United States squad at the U20 World Cup in May. Will be in Europe one day. pic.twitter.com/pZSu8m6zod— Tom Bogert (@tombogert) February 7, 2023
I get why a bunch of people who primarily care about the development of young Americans are annoyed at times, but the primary goal of the Philadelphia Union is to compete and win trophies, it's hard to fault them too much when they're doing that while being one of the better teams for developing Americans. They are pretty much the model franchise at the moment. Union ??? Union II (MLSNP, third division) Union Development Squad (NPSL, for college kids) MLS Next (academy) In any case, it seems like the current gap in the development pathway is between MLSNP and consistent MLS minutes. That is actually a significant gap, especially for a top MLS team like Philly where the latter is hard to come by. Paxten could have benefitted from something in that gap, as could Sullivan/McGlynn/Craig if they don't get as many minutes as people want for them. And obviously dozens of examples from other teams, some far more egregious, see for example Jalen Neal having zero MLS minutes for the LA Galaxy. But there are two existing options: First, loans within MLS, I don't understand why the top teams don't loan out homegrowns to subpar teams, whether it's teams that don't spend much money (eg Rapids, Quakes, etc.), don't develop many of their own homegrowns (eg Dynamo, Timbers, etc.) or expansion teams that lack depth (Charlotte, St Louis, etc.). MLS seems to hardly ever do intra-league loans. I think there have only been a few over the years, the only one I can remember was Tony Cascio... Second, there's the second division USL Championship. With the creation of MLS Next Pro, can MLS teams no longer have USL affiliates? I remember the days when 3-4 guys would go on loan to the (independent) USL affiliates. That got replaced by the "2" teams which are now MLS Next Pro, but if the third division is not a high enough level for the top talents, why not bring back those USL affiliations / loan agreements? Union - MLS intra-league loans - USL Championship affiliation / loans (second division) Union II (MLSNP, third division) Union Development Squad (NPSL, for college kids) MLS Next (academy)
For me..............the NPSL team is kinda pointless. Not that there are any negatives. Let's expand the nextwork. It just seems kinda pointless. If a kid is in-between MLS Next Pro and MLS (or there isn't playing time available in MLS), then he should be loaned to the USL. A player isn't going to demonstrate his readiness to play in MLS by going to the NPSL. I don't know who exactly that NPSL team would be for. We have an entire division of Texas teams in the NPSL. We pay a lot of attention to it. Guess how many players from the NPSL Texas division have gone on to MLS success? Just a wild guess. A lot of those teams have former FCD academy players that didn't "make it." Guys who went to the NCAAs and are still playing in a semi-pro manner. Bobby Edet and guys like that. [The most famous current teams in that division are the Laredo Heat, Denton Diablos, and Fort Worth Vaqueros. The Vaqueros seem awfully ambitious. I don't know how much longer they're going to be in the NPSL.]
I think one of the reasons we see intraleague loans a lot in places like Spain or England is because the gap in talent between the teams can be so large that there's a decent amount of space between someone stuck behind a Chelsea player and someone on Southampton. Or Real Madrid and Getafe. Martin Odegaard was really good, but he wasn't playing because it was Real Madrid. But in MLS, there probably aren't a ton of situations like this. Paxten Aaronson was stuck behind Daniel Gazdag, but I'm not sure there's a ton of teams there where he'd have won a starting role. I don't doubt he was better than some backups, but I think there's not a ton of marginal utility on either end. The one place I can it happen where it isn't, and it might just be roster inertia or restrictions -- people lock themselves in -- is mid-season injury issues. If someone's 6 goes down, might not Danny Leyva or Obed Vargas be a good loan? I think the other things that hurt this is that without intraleague transfers for dollars, it's hard to the loaning team to buy the player, which hurts some of the longer term upside for them. I think this is also where lack of relegation does remove some incentive. But the biggest thing is everybody's talent is pretty close. USL wanted the MLS2 teams out. Some of the MLS teams, I think, were happy to go (MLS Next is definitely cheaper to run) but others I think have been bummed, like the Red Bulls, etc. USL only wants independent teams. I think most of it is simply that MLS2 teams don't draw attendance and don't try to. It's hard to have a vibrant league when have the teams are placeholders, full of players who won't be there next year. Minor league sports have their charm, but USL is trying to be major league. The other reason is that some point, USL is going to try and challenge MLS, and there's complexity there. But for now, I'd love to see some more formalized loan arrangements. There are issues -- USL teams are both trying their own academies AND actively poaching MLS acadmey kids. I think now would be a good time for MLS and USL to find some rules of engagement here. Maybe even have USSF step in. I think that this is a FAR more likely scenario than intraleague loans, which I suspect will always be low.[/QUOTE]
Isn't it true that clubs can send young players on intra-league loan, but it has to be for the full year? No option for a recall? I seem to remember that. So a club like Philly can't send a CB to Dallas for three games if Dallas has an injury crisis. Or a team like Dallas can't send a young forward to Philly for a month to cover for Philly's losses to the U20WC. Also, in a salary capped league......................these young players are a team's depth players. Cheap, domestic depth. They serve a necessary function. We've seen clubs send their young players on loan to European clubs. Roberts and Servania in Dallas. Ocampo-Chavez and Kitahara in Seattle. I'm sure people can come up with more examples. Tanner has connections. If a young Philly prospect is really blocked, I bet a Euro loan can be worked out. I'm just not quite sure who this NPSL team is for. But............that's just me.
I'm not sure about the loan rules, but I think you are also right that there are just more attractive options. I think it's a way to keep connected with players who choose college.
This is the biggest issue, but lets just pretend that Paxten could have started for Chicago Fire last year...he is still a key back-up on a championship caliber team. He is also a cheap back-up and a player that Philly would prefer to control his development versus the Fire. Fire would likely have to pick-up his salary and also give up some GAM for a one year rental and Philly would need space to replace him with a player that is equal too or better. The Venn Diagram on these situations is almost NIL. It has happened before Columbus loaned Sebastian Berhalter to Austin in 2021. Turns out he wasn't really in Columbus' plans because he came back from loan and they traded him to Vancouver for nothing basically.
Yep. There's no real upside for either side. Chicago had Shaqiri in the middle and their own young attacking mid in Brian Gutierrez anyway -- they sucked, but why would they want Paxten? That wasn't their issue. AND LOOK WHAT HAPPENED THEN! THE DESTRUCTION OF THE USMNT! No, no more intraleague loans. But seriously, I think opening up intraleague transfers would likely do more. Paxten likely wanted to go to Europe, but at some point, someone might simply want to move for PT, and the the upside of a future would make it worth it.
Just picked the Fire out of thin air. Could be any team with an opening at the position. Still not a lot in it for either team.
I’d be surprised if a young academy player with little to no MLS minutes would be of interest to a lesser MLS team. Although a couple of the Philly guys we’ve talked about last season probably would. The lack of USL affiliations / loan agreements is what’s going to hurt player development the most. I can’t believe that it really was costing the league that much that they didn’t think it would recoup itself by producing better academy talent that would sell for more in the end.
I disagree. Loaning players to the USL is more dicey than anything. The USL team has no incentive to develop the player or play them for that matter. MLS was already having this issue in the past. The USL wanted to move away from MLS "reserve" teams playing in their leagues. They have grander visions now that they're on stable and growing footing since MLS helped them out 10 years ago. MLS NXT Pro should continue to improve, and offer a competitive environment for young players to test themselves and grow. Plus MLS controls that environment. So say if Philly wants to experiment and play Brandon Craig at the 6/9 they can do that in NXT Pro and see how adjusts. One of the big drawbacks to the USL affiliations was the fact that you couldn't just bring a player up, or send them down for minutes. As an example say Paxten Aaronson was an unused sub because the Union were playing down a man and trying to protect a lead. The next day paxten starts in MLS NXT Pro to get game minutes and stay sharp.
Fair points. I agree that there were some players that didn’t work out at USL that would have benefited if they could have gone to MLS NXT instead. I also agree that it’s better for USL to not have these developmental teams like Toronto FC 2. However, USL has the advantage of being a step above MLS NXT for players that are on the fringe of being first team ready. The ideal setup would have these leagues more integrated where USL is a stepping stone between MLS NXT and MLS. This type of setup would need the ability for MLS teams to recall these players from USL if it isn’t working out. My worry without USL being a part of player development is that we could see fewer 17/18yr olds making their debuts in MLS and more 19/20yr olds instead because of the talent gap to MLS between leagues. A 19/20yr old debuting in MLS has less of a chance to develop into a Tyler Adams or Aaronson than one debuting at 17/18yrs old.
You also have to remember that the MLS NXT Pro teams usually train with the First Team (MLS). So coaches are getting to see them everyday competing against MLS talent. The best players will still make their way through.
I don’t know the exact number, but several players that were signed to Next Pro contracts ended up earning MLS deals in the middle of the season last year. Probably for the reason you mentioned, they impressed in practice.
Sullivan hurt? Didn't play in the last preseason game. He, McGlynn, and Craig all started the previous game, but it looks like the preferred starting XI, for now, is this: Andre Blake - Kai Wagner, Jack Elliott, Jakob Glesnes, Olivier Mbaizo - José Martínez, Leon Flach, Alejandro Bedoya, Dániel Gazdag - Joaquín Torres, Julián Carranza
Is there a reason you're basing the "preferred starting XI" on one preseason match? It wouldn't really shock me if that was the opening day lineup. Just curious why one match caught your attention so much when preseason is ongoing.
Just that teams usually incorporate more and more of a starting XI as preseason moves on to start building chemistry, and once they start running a starting XI, they usually don't move in the opposite direction once they've started playing favorites. It could ultimately be different, but typically that's what I've seen.