MLS v. the World

Voronwë · Post by **Voronwë** » August 2, 2005, 11:52 am

No i'm not saying that the MLS (the US first division soccer league) is a top-flight league.

This thread is about in a recent stint of exhibition matches, the MLS teams performed against top level European competition. I say that because most international people look at MLS like it is a shit league. Press have said it isn't even one of the top 50 leagues in the world. Which is a total joke.

Caveats:

1. these matches were preseason warmup matches for the European sides, and they were playing MLS squads who were match fit in midseason form.

2. MLS teams have a salary cap of around $2 million - for the whole team.

Columbus (MLS) beat Fulham (EPL) 2-1
Chelsea (EPL and $200M) beats DC United (MLS) 2-1 and DC was very competitive in the early going, pushing the match
Real Madrid easily topped LA 2-0
AC Milan had a tough time with Chicago, but won 3-1

For the sake of this analysis, i will ignore how the MLS allstars (guys who had practiced together 1 or 2 times) dominated Fulham 4-1 as well.

nobody would ever say that any MLS team is in the same class as Milan, Madrid, Chelsea, or whatever. But the point is, the MLS teams i think proved a lot to themselves in that they are much more competitive than a lot of people give them credit for.

It is no coincidence that the US National Team has risen in power so dramatically over the 10 year lifespan of this domestic league to be the best team in North America. And sorry Mexico, that title will be ours going forward as well.

Ogbar · Post by **Ogbar** » August 2, 2005, 12:12 pm

I never could watch an MLS game on TV - they always seemed to lack that extra spark. That said, I havn't really checked them out the last season and a half, and I've heard similar comments from other sources that the league is improving. The local team, the Revolution, has had been a pretty good squad of late, too. I think I will give them another looksee, maybe even take in a game up in Foxboro next season.

Kelshara · Post by **Kelshara** » August 2, 2005, 1:00 pm

I'd leave Fullham out of that discussion btw

They hardly belong among those other teams.

Also remember that the teams might not have played their best players through the games.

There is no doubt that MLS has improved but it is nowhere near the leagues of England, France, Spain or Italy.

Voronwë · Post by **Voronwë** » August 2, 2005, 1:08 pm

right, i agree with all of that. i wasnt trying to suggest otherwise.

Chidoro · Post by **Chidoro** » August 2, 2005, 1:35 pm

I hear you Og, there's just no juice to the games in NY from the ones I've seen. The problem I've noticed by me is that Giant's stadium is just too damn big and the seats are too far away from the field. There is a proposal for a 30,000 seat stadium off the Harrison street PATH train stop outside of Newark. From what I've heard, that part of town has a massive soccer following and the team would do well there, but noone can finance it so far. I couldn't imagine playing in worse conditions than to play in a huge footbal stadium with 8,000 fans chirping. It gives the term, "Archery Practice" a whole new meaning.

Bubba Grizz · Post by **Bubba Grizz** » August 2, 2005, 2:19 pm

How many downs in Soccer?

JK

I loved soccer growing up but it is kind of like baseball in that it is way more fun to play than to watch.

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » August 17, 2005, 11:32 pm

This is great news for U.S. Soccer fans:

ABC and ESPN to broadcast World Cup in HD

BRISTOL, Conn. -- ABC and ESPN will broadcast their fourth straight World Cup next year and will televise all 64 games in high definition.

The networks will not decide until after the draw on Dec. 9 how to split the games among ABC, ESPN and ESPN2, they said Wednesday.

All games of the tournament, which will be played in Germany from June 9 to July 9, will be broadcast live. For the 2002 World Cup, which was in Japan and South Korea, 58 games were televised live, with the final on ABC, 16 on ESPN and the rest on ESPN2. Because of the 13-hour time difference to the East Coast of the United States, games were on during the middle of the night.

All games were broadcast live during the 1998 tournament in France, with ABC televising 14, ESPN 27 and ESPN2 23. Germany, like France, has a six-hour time difference to the U.S. East Coast.

The networks, owned by The Walt Disney Co., acquired the rights from Soccer United Marketing, an affiliate of Major League Soccer. SUM said it basically gets the air time for free, sells advertising and covers production costs, while the networks' affiliates sell some advertising time.

Leah LaPlaca, ESPN's senior director of programming and acquisitions, declined comment on the financial arrangements.

At least 20 high-definition cameras will be used for each game by the host broadcaster. ABC and ESPN plan to have their announcers at a majority of the games but will have them call some of the games from studios in the United States.

LaPlaca said that ESPN/ESPN2 also plans to televise two European Champions League games most weeks when the tournament is going on this season. In recent years, ESPN/ESPN2 have broadcast only one game in many weeks.

SUM paid about $40 million to buy the U.S. TV and radio rights to the 2002 and 2006 World Cups and the 2003 Women's World Cup from German media company Kirch Group. Kirch purchased the rights from FIFA, soccer's governing body, in May 2001.

Voronwë · Post by **Voronwë** » August 18, 2005, 12:55 pm

yeah i am excited about the HD angle =)

Crav · Post by **Crav** » August 27, 2005, 6:08 pm

Found this article rather interesting.

Link

Every league needs a villian
Ives Galarcep

Standing at the gates of Giants Stadium last Sunday, you couldn't help but notice how different the crowd looked that was walking in to watch Major League Soccer. Mexicans were making their way into the Meadowlands in numbers never before seen for an MLS match at the Swamp. Most wore a familiar red-striped kit and smiles that suggested they were happy to be there. It didn't seem to matter much that the team they were going to root for boasted one of the worst records in MLS history.

The fans showed up because the new star players had arrived for the lowly expansion club Chivas USA. Francisco Palencia and Juan Pablo Garcia, bona fide stars of the Mexican soccer world, were finally here to fulfill Jorge Vergara's promise that the American version of Chivas de Guadalajara would own MLS. The debut for the newcomers went as well as Chivas could have hoped. Palencia and Garcia combined for all three of the team's goals, including a pair of world-class efforts, and only some extremely shaky officiating kept Chivas USA from winning an attack-filled match that was as entertaining a regular season as you'll find in MLS.

Why was the match important? It signified the first evidence that maybe, just maybe, Chivas USA will be what it was supposed to be, a dangerous and entertaining club with a built-in fan base in the nation's larger markets. Why does that matter? It matters because a strong Chivas USA is good for MLS.

Spare me the "our league doesn't need the influence of Mexican soccer" babble. Chivas USA could be a boon for MLS because it could give the league an element it hasn't had in its 10 years of existence, a true villain. Picture the scenario: Bolstered by Palencia and Garcia, the Goats develop into a power in 2006. The fans of Chivas de Guadalajara in this country who have stayed away start attending more and more games, both at home and on the road. The pre-existing hatred for all things Mexican soccer among American fans would surely foster some added support for Chivas opponents on a weekly basis and that sense of rivalry could result in better, more lively atmospheres for MLS matches.

Can't you just picture it? The visitor's section at Pizza Hut Park and the future homes for Chicago and the MetroStars rocking with red-striped fans cheering on the Goats as the rest of the stadium tries to drown them out (never mind the revenue MLS teams will enjoy from a strong Chivas following once more soccer-specific stadiums are built). Best of all, can you imagine what the Home Depot Center will feel like when the Chivas USA-Galaxy rivalry isn't just an automatic beat down for Landon Donovan's bunch?

Some critics of the mere existence of Chivas USA in MLS have suggested that the club has damaged, or could damage, the identity of the league. Does a league have an identity in its 10th season? Can a league which so often has had teams change nicknames, logos, and in the very near future, locations, have an identity? Can a league that borrows names from European clubs really be above including a Mexican-influenced franchise? Does a league in a country as diverse as ours really have to have a homogeneous identity?

You don't have to root for the Goats, but how can you not appreciate what they could bring to the MLS table? Watching them play on Sunday, with Palencia and Garcia flashing their impressive attacking skills, you can't help but appreciate their willingness to attack and create rather than to destroy and slow things down as is the preference of some MLS clubs. Even the most die-hard Metros fans in attendance on Sunday had to appreciate the skill Palencia and Garcia displayed.

There is the obvious concern about the league's ability to assure that Chivas USA is playing by the rules financially, as much as there are financial rules in the league. There is no salary cap, only a budget that gives MLS teams flexibility under certain circumstances. As a new club, Chivas USA has been given leeway to sign a handful of stars for more than the "maximum" salary slots currently in place. In Palencia, Garcia and Ramirez, the Goats have three of the league's highest paid players, an arrangement that is understandable but one that can't be allowed to become permanent. MLS has not hesitated to break up strong teams because of an inflating salary situation (D.C. United and Chicago have gone through the painful process) and it shouldn't hesitate to tell Vergara that he can't spend an unlimited amount on players.

That is a concern for a year or so down the road. For now, Chivas has the players in place to provide a glimpse of what could be a bright future for the club. The idea of having a successful Chivas USA is not something MLS fans should fear. Regardless of whether the club is Mexican, Portuguese or Dutch influenced, what matters is MLS improving on the field, at the turnstiles and in the bank. Chivas USA has the potential to help MLS accomplish all three.

Just wonder what y'all thought. Personally I think it's a good thing. Anything that will improve revenue for MLS is good. You have to admit that the attacking South/Central American style of play is very entertaining and when you’re trying to build interest entertainment is key.

Also if Chivas is successful then other Mexican and non Mexican clubs might take interest and invest in new clubs. Ajax America has already expressed interest in buying into existing clubs and creating a new club. Could other European clubs take interest and send some of their younger players to develop in MLS?

retiredwikit · Post by **retiredwikit** » August 30, 2005, 12:19 pm

US national team has moved up to 6th in the Fifa Rankings.. I watched in 2002 as the US team got robbed, by the Germans, and I'll watch again as they make their trek to World Cup 2006