Basically Wagman is saying that because MLS's schedule is still in full tilt during the summer competitions, the fans of MLS suffer as the team's top stars are missing. The article is here: http://www.soccertimes.com/wagman/2003/jun11.htm My response is "Yes, but I don't really care." I'm much more interested in watching the US's games and seeing how the new players in the pool perform at the next level. I guess I feel that MLS is here to help build the US national program and those MLS teams with players missing for the Nats just have to take one for the team. And these stripped down rosters in MLS are one reason that the youth of the teams actually get some meaningful PT, which is great.
I care. I agree with Bruce and just about everyone else. The Confed Cup is a crock of *hit. MLS paying customers are getting cheated. But such is the overcrowded global soccer calendar. No point crying about it now.
As a Burn fan, these national team call-ups have never impacted me - as far as I am concerned I'm all for it. More soccer = good. I can watch MLS and then watch MLS players get valuable Intl experience. The Confederations Cup may not be 3rd in line behind the WC and the Euro Championships - but lining up against Brazil in a froeign land is good experience for Twellman, Convey, etc... I don't mind seeing new MLS players get a chance to play. Like I say it has rearely hurt my team, so I have been able to have it both ways. But a few more "drab" 0-0 affairs and I may change my mins. Colorado and DC - you suck.
I can't say I exactly agree with Wagman here. I mean, he's basically calling MLS brass brainless but he uses issues (shootout, clock) that were corrected by Garber as his argument showing MLS was pig-headed. Seriously, does he think we can go away from a summer schedule? For a league that relies hevaily on a walk-up crowd? Try to be realistic. Also, does anyone really think 4 games in a 30-game schedule for a league that allows 80% of its teams into the playoffs is a big deal? If a fan is paying to see the "stars" of MLS, as Wagman claims, then that fan should know that those stars won't be there well before they buy their tickets. I think if you're not aware that the US is playing and that the stars are away, you're probably not even aware of who the stars are. As a Revs fan I actually LIKE missing Twellman because now I'll get to see how Noonan can handle some added playing time. If you look across the league, I'm sure there's going to be 1-2 people who take this opportunity and run with it. If that means that I have to watch four games to find out Noonan sucks, so be it. At least I'll KNOW he sucks and not think he's just getting screwed by the coaching staff (not that I think he is, just making a point).
I disagree. I like the guys getting called in for two reasons. 1) More Nats games, especially against good squads in a tournament setting. Any time I get to watch the Nats play I'm happy. 2) MLS youngsters get a chance to show what they're worth. MLS coaches and GMs show their worth, or lack there of, by playing their draft picks and aquisitions. It shows how a nicely managed roster with depth (KC ) can step up when a star or two are gone.
Besides from all reports coming out of FIFA, this is surely the last Confed cup we'll be seeing. Its replacement, possibly the Club World Cup?
After thinking about, Wagman is awful cavilier in his suggestions. Change the schedule? Before HDC opened up, we had 7 teams competing directly with pro or college football teams for stadium use. You can't just dismiss that without bringing up an alternative. Not to mention it brought in 2 owners (who are both still here) who might otherwise have stayed away. MLS didn't really have a choice then or now. Not to mention we've seen what chilly weather does to soccer crowds - even in SSS (Columbus). Evidently we soccer fans don't own warm jackets.
And MLS is right. Their hold on mindshare of the American sports fan (the one that doesn't post here, of course) is tenuous. Mr. Wagman left out a very important point in his arguement: the individual game is really not the contest in Soccer, it's the season. Fans who purchased seats at the Meadowlands to watch the MetroStars lose wanted to see their team, same as I'll watch it on TV because the Galaxy is my team. I probably wouldn't watch a friendly, as the points don't count in the standings.
A pretty lame article. Just what does Wagman want, anyway? First he says "MLS has long argued this summer schedule is necessary so soccer will not conflict with the National Football League season" as if he's arguing that MLS should switch, as he says it to a schedule (i.e., fall-winter-spring)) like "(m)ost of the rest of the world plays." Of course, if that's his arguement, he's insane. While MLS does play "through the heat of the summer," can you imagine playing winter soccer in places like ... well, most of the US, and certainly MLS cities like Chicago, Boston, Denver, Columbus, New York, Kansas City. It would be impossible, as pitches would be frozen solid for months each season. Geez can you imagine what the playing surfaces would be like in Soldier Field, Gilette, etc, if MLS were playing in those places in December? And it's not just the NFL with which MLS would be competing. Sure, the NFL would gobble up each and every Sunday from August-February. But college football would take away all the fall Saturdays. Then there's the NBA, NHL, college basketball. It would be suicide for MLS to try and play a "traditional" schedule. Then he talks about general scheduling issues. Blah, blah, blah. Yeah, I agree that MLS scheduling could be better. Thing is, it will get better, and I don't think it has much to do with overcoming league "stubbornness." MLS played around with the clock, with OT, but it eventually listened to the fans and changed. It's started to realize that rosters are too small, and it's beginning to expand them, too. MLS is even talking about fiedling full reserve sides. Mostly, though, MLS has realized that it made a serious mistake in underestimating the importance of appropriate venues when it kicked-off in 1996. I'm shocked that Wagman doesn't see the link between stadium construction and better scheduling. When the day comes that MLS controls scheduling in all its stadiums, I think that many other things will just fall into place: we'll see the league employing more flexible scheduling to limit the conflicts Wagman is refering to; we'll see teams be able to field reserve sides because they'll have their own stadiums and practice facilities; we'll see more revenue streams which could lead to bigger rosters and higher salaries. Wagman is arguing for a revolution. But the gradual evolutionary path the league is already on will suffice.
what a pathetic article... does columbus gain an advantage by keeping mcbride? well umm, maybe, but do they also gain a huge disadvantage by losing cunningham, frankie, and martino to the usa team and add to that duncan to the kiwi team? it's called research wag's, learn about it...his writing is rediculous.
I would love to see a split season as is done in Europe and the rest of the world, but is it realistic, is it possible? Maybe it is if the so called summer brake is just that a brake and not an extended period of time, not more then 4 weeks that is for sure. Once each time has it's own stadium to play in whenever feels like it some kind of overlap with other sports is possible, With the extended season this will be a good test to see how it all works out. People are making to much fuss about the cold weather, like someone said here soccer fans don't own any coats, that was funny. NFL plays thru a good portion of winter right,so what is the big deal . No matter how you slice this ,Wagmans's point is for a summer brake and not a revolution.