PDA

View Full Version : Why all the MLS Bashing?



Dub Narcotic
08-11-2008, 03:40 PM
I'm getting pretty tired of every single thread on this board having some comment along the lines of 'stupid MLS, blah, blah, blah' or 'Don Garber is a moron, blah blah blah'. The MLS existing at all, and providing a sustainable scaffolding for North American football, is a small miracle, and is the result of hundreds of millions of dollars of investment at the public and private levels and countless careers and man hours of work in the face of incredible hurdles and skepticism. Certainly nobody is getting rich off this league. Yet, listening to some on this board, it seems like everyone involved in the league should be grateful that sophisticated European football watchers here in Toronto have condescended to watch a few games.


Look at the problems in European football:

A few big teams win *everything*. How is this sustainable? Not only do the elite teams constantly destroy everyone else, but they use their influence to pry players away from their home clubs and exert influence over referees and officials. Sport should be about a level playing field, and the European leagues are anything but.

Match fixing. From the biggest league to the smallest, match fixing is a repeated problem all across the continent. This is a huge problem, but seems to be accepted as part of the business.

Transfer anarchy. The typical transfer process in Europe involves greedy agents, compliant newspapers, corrupt managers and jerk-ass narcissistic players (err, 'slaves'). This is what we are aspiring to?

Owner insanity. Corrupt Russian douchebags, criminal politicians, debt-ridden flippers and Ken Bates. What else has to be said?


Compare this to MLS, which has good parity between the teams, so half the games aren't already decided before they start, and good ownership, so as long as there is some fan support, the franchises are stable. The player allocation process supports parity, but still allows smart clubs who allocate their cap dollars and scouting resources well to have long-term success. MLS certainly needs to improve in a lot of areas, but in the most important ones, quality of play and fan experience, the league is growing organically, if slowly, and is is a pretty good place for being less than fifteen years old.


It's hard to build something good from nothing, and easy to crap over someone else's efforts. I'm disappointed that so many on this board (and I know not everyone is like this) choose simple-minded cynicism and negativity over more moderate and nuanced discussion over MLS's present and future.

Roogsy
08-11-2008, 03:42 PM
I have to agree. MLS isn't the end all be all...but it's ours and I get upset when I see attendance like the Colorado game because I would like to see some passion in North America for the game. MLS has the best chance to get that done, I will do my part.

gtaguy
08-11-2008, 03:49 PM
you made some good points .

I will say though that i think all the bashing is a form of demonstration by us the fans caring for the sport and the league,
In the hopes that you can get a good product and make it much better.

I only get pissed when i gotta watch the tfc game on some fuckin bold channel that i gotta pay to get now... F.U. CBC...

RedsYNWA
08-11-2008, 03:52 PM
Europe is not the way to go..... the way they are going reminds me of NASL...
The madness will stop and lets hope the MLS is around to benefit

jloome
08-11-2008, 03:58 PM
I have to disagree. While I think the principle behind the argument -- financial and competitive development at a controlled pace -- is still needed in MLS, many of the rules people complain about here (such as player 'discoveries", allocation funding, and side-deal sponsorship that skips the cap altogether, ala beckham) have nothing to do with competitive balance and a lot more to do with moulding the league into MLS' vision of what it should be, whether that's fair to fans in Chicago and Toronto or not.

Additionally, by ignoring traditions from other countries in favour of an "American Solution" to various issues, MLS has alienated huge swaths of American soccer fans who continue to take top-flight euro soccer seriously but think their own league is a joke; witness how a charity pickup game staged by Thierry Henry and Steve Nash in New York outdraws the Red Bulls 3-1, and it becomes evident there are a lot of star-struck soccer fans out there who won't be die-hard supporters of their local team until it's seen as world-class. New Yorkers don't want to be thought of as home to a development league, thank you very much; ditto with LA.

Football lines on fields still? The handfull of playoff games counting for the league title but not the 30 games during the regular season? Obvious favourtism, with the rules being thrown out, in the cases of Ruiz, Donovan, and McBride? Contractual stipulations that a player doesn't control his own movement (which Bosman showed was illegal under European Trade law, and which probably wouldn't stand up here, either)?

We're living in a football backwater. Yes, it's better than it was; and yes, many of these exercises in controlled growth have been necessary. But any league that can be the fifth-best attended in the world (allegedly) should be able to carry itself without most of this crap now.

Double the salary cap, add a second (or even third) DP, make the season for the main title and the playoffs for the cup; get rid of the ridiculously short 18-man roster; make youth development teams and leagues mandatory for each club.

When they take some of those steps, people will start taking MLS a bit seriously. Until then, it's popular more for being the only game in town than any legitimate reason.

Roogsy
08-11-2008, 04:05 PM
Oh no...for sure. There are things MLS needs to change in order to be taken seriously.

But at the same time, some of those things that were put in place is what helped the league survive. It's just that at some point, they have to do away with those things if they are going to take the next step.

Parkdale
08-11-2008, 04:12 PM
simple: nothing's perfect.

change what can be changed.

Beach_Red
08-11-2008, 04:13 PM
Double the salary cap, add a second (or even third) DP, make the season for the main title and the playoffs for the cup; get rid of the ridiculously short 18-man roster; make youth development teams and leagues mandatory for each club.

Double the salary cap for sure and a second or third DP are things that will probably happen in the next few years. Certainly with the expansion fees going up so much and the bigger sponsors coming on board there will be a lot of pressure for those kinds of changes.

Making the season the main title will take a lot longer - it's just foriegn in North America. But that could change over time. Like youth development. Baseball and hockey have been the only sports here with farm teams (I don't know if there's a connection but they also have the most foriegn players) - and the MLS seems determined to copy the NFL. Well, you can't argue with success, I guess, but I do think over time there will compromises on these issues.

v00d00daddy
08-11-2008, 04:50 PM
I agree somewhat with the OP but it also bothers me that some people don't expect more from MLS. Everybody wants parity in the league. Why? It doesn't make anything more entertaining because if it did people in cities like K.C. and Columbus and other poorly supported markets would go out to a game. I know MLS can't relive the NASL debacle but what this league needs are names. Bonafide, recognized football names. There is no other way to gain credibility. It doesn't matter how many times MLS wins in the All Star game. Until this league attracts some real stars (past or present), it will never grow. Ruud Gullit leaving L.A. is not a good thing for this league. It kinda worries me.

rocker
08-11-2008, 05:17 PM
Everybody wants parity in the league. Why? It doesn't make anything more entertaining because if it did people in cities like K.C. and Columbus and other poorly supported markets would go out to a game. I know MLS can't relive the NASL debacle but what this league needs are names. Bonafide, recognized football names. There is no other way to gain credibility. It doesn't matter how many times MLS wins in the All Star game. Until this league attracts some real stars (past or present), it will never grow. Ruud Gullit leaving L.A. is not a good thing for this league. It kinda worries me.

You have two different points here.. one is parity, one is names. I don't think they are related. You can have name players in this league while still having parity.

I like enforced parity through a salary cap because in a developing soccer culture the last thing you want is teams that never have a chance of winning because they can't afford it. KC and Columbus's support might have been even less if they were in the basement every year cuz LA or some team were spending 10x as much. And MLS parity doesn't necessarily mean all management teams are awesome and will make good use of that parity. Columbus certainly has had a pretty screwed up management team over the years, who didn't necessarily make the most of the situation.

I agree with Jloome about raising the cap and other issues. If you raise the cap significantly the quality will rise without hurting the parity.
I do recognize tho that Garber has to keep things relatively under wraps until they start negotiating with the players next year on a new CBA. No sense giving $$$ away now.

v00d00daddy
08-11-2008, 05:22 PM
You have two different points here.. one is parity, one is names. I don't think they are related. You can have name players in this league while still having parity.

I like enforced parity through a salary cap because in a developing soccer culture the last thing you want is teams that never have a chance of winning because they can't afford it. KC and Columbus's support might have been even less if they were in the basement every year cuz LA or some team were spending 10x as much. And MLS parity doesn't necessarily mean all management teams are awesome and will make good use of that parity. Columbus certainly has had a pretty screwed up management team over the years, who didn't necessarily make the most of the situation.

I agree with Jloome about raising the cap and other issues. If you raise the cap significantly the quality will rise without hurting the parity.
I do recognize tho that Garber has to keep things relatively under wraps until they start negotiating with the players next year on a new CBA. No sense giving $$$ away now.

Agreed. I didn't mean to come off as if I don't want parity. I just don't need to have parity at the expense of quality play. I hope the salary cap is raised but more importantly I hope the league does more to attract big name players.

RPB_Brantford_08
08-11-2008, 05:27 PM
I have to agree. MLS isn't the end all be all...but it's ours and I get upset when I see attendance like the Colorado game because I would like to see some passion in North America for the game. MLS has the best chance to get that done, I will do my part.

The fact Colorado had poor attendance had more to do they were playing TFC. TFC is not a good draw away from BMO, the Jays, Leafs, Raptors all face the attendance drop off away from home.

Dub Narcotic
08-11-2008, 05:34 PM
I have to disagree. While I think the principle behind the argument -- financial and competitive development at a controlled pace -- is still needed in MLS, many of the rules people complain about here (such as player 'discoveries", allocation funding, and side-deal sponsorship that skips the cap altogether, ala beckham) have nothing to do with competitive balance and a lot more to do with moulding the league into MLS' vision of what it should be, whether that's fair to fans in Chicago and Toronto or not.


My argument was not that MLS is perfect, but that the rules make sense for the league and that we are better off than Europe in a lot of ways. I also don't think we shouldn't criticize MLS, but that the criticisms should be grounded in reality and be warranted. I agree that the examples you pointed out above are not positive for the league, but I they are easily fixed and fairly minor compared to the severe lack of competitive parity or the transfer gong show in the big European leagues.

Also, its the tone of the criticism that often gets my goat. It's often of the form 'x is wrong, mls fucking sucks'. When a clear penalty isn't called at Old Trafford you never hear 'x is wrong, EPL fucking sucks' on this board, even though the referee being afraid to make a call is a direct result of the league's failures. I'm never impressed with mindless bashing, especially when the hard work of the MLS has given so many TFC fans an experience they obviously find very important to their lives, and it seems the league never gets praised for its successes.



Additionally, by ignoring traditions from other countries in favour of an "American Solution" to various issues, MLS has alienated huge swaths of American soccer fans who continue to take top-flight euro soccer seriously but think their own league is a joke; witness how a charity pickup game staged by Thierry Henry and Steve Nash in New York outdraws the Red Bulls 3-1, and it becomes evident there are a lot of star-struck soccer fans out there who won't be die-hard supporters of their local team until it's seen as world-class. New Yorkers don't want to be thought of as home to a development league, thank you very much; ditto with LA.
Are you arguing that footy fans are not watching NYRB because of allocation money rules? I don't agree with that argument at all. After all, the game is same on the pitch from 0' to 90', and that's all that matters. League structure varies all around the world, from two-part schedules to playoffs, and I don't see why we're not entitled to run the league our own way. Fans will come to see a good quality of play with a good atmosphere, the rest of the factors are minor. To get that good quality of play requires a lot of money for transfers and development programs and to criticize MLS for not having spending tens of millions of dollars when the finances of the league don't support it is unfair.

As a NBA fan, I often read NBA fans talking about European basketball. Now, European basketball teams play by different rules, don't have a cap or draft, and participate in the Euroleague, all of which is different from the NBA, which is the originating and biggest league in the world. In general, NBA fans appreciate that the Europeans have a different way of organizing sport leagues and have no problems with any of the variations in the game on that side of the Atlantic and are glad to see the sport spreading across the world. I never see xenophobic anti-European basketball rants on the NBA boards or posts like 'the Greek league is fucking stupid, no one will take it seriously until they adopt the NBA 3', and the intolerance amongs football fans in North American constantly diappoints me.

Once again, this is not to say that I don't agree with criticisms about the way MLS does some things, but getting rid of discovery claims and painting over the football lines is, to me, a lot easier to fix then to make the EPL league title realistically winnable by more than the same two or three teams for the decades to come.

Carts
08-11-2008, 05:44 PM
The fact Colorado had poor attendance had more to do they were playing TFC. TFC is not a good draw away from BMO, the Jays, Leafs, Raptors all face the attendance drop off away from home.

100% FALSE!

The Jays and Raptors face attendance drops on the road...

The Maple Leafs actually help attendance in away venues - home teams see a huge surge...

Florida Panthers / Tampa Bay Lightning - always sell out Leaf game, no others (except home opener)...

Canadian Western Team - fought the NHL's revised schedule that would exclude the Leafs visiting their arena's because it would hurt their bottom line too much at the gate...

The Leafs are (for some reason) one of, if not the NHL's biggest draw at the gate...

Carts...

TheHollister
08-11-2008, 05:57 PM
The Maple Leafs actually help attendance in away venues - home teams see a huge surge...

QFT. I've been to games in Buffalo that have had more Leaf fans in attendance than Sabers fans. :canada:

jloome
08-11-2008, 06:34 PM
Once again, this is not to say that I don't agree with criticisms about the way MLS does some things, but getting rid of discovery claims and painting over the football lines is, to me, a lot easier to fix then to make the EPL league title realistically winnable by more than the same two or three teams for the decades to come.


Yeah, we're pretyt much on the same page, I think. There's a lot wrong with world football right now, aso we don't need to adopt what doesn't work.

And you're right about the general viciousness of the comments on the board sometimes -- but that's just a microcosm of the society we live in. As part of my daily job, I edit the letters in our paper (and write those annoying little responses); the number that are just viciously nasty actually outnumber those that are reasoned and substantial by a fair margin.

People want simple answers to complex issues, whether it's the team they're following or the community they live in. The unfortunate reality is that we're probably at one of those social watershed moments , where the schism between the cognitive development of one section of the public and the other is growing by leaps and bounds; we have more brilliant people now than ever before, but we also have more ignorance striking out at reason and intelligence than ever before, due to social orthodoxy and the threats imposed upon it by the information age.

So, the next time you see someone whose first response to a problem is "fire the coach!", consider that he's probably the same idiot who writes to the Sun and says the easiest way to curb crime is to start executing people. Simple, socially disconnected, eventually irrelevant.

ochos
08-11-2008, 06:52 PM
Yeah, we're pretyt much on the same page, I think. There's a lot wrong with world football right now, aso we don't need to adopt what doesn't work.

And you're right about the general viciousness of the comments on the board sometimes -- but that's just a microcosm of the society we live in. As part of my daily job, I edit the letters in our paper (and write those annoying little responses); the number that are just viciously nasty actually outnumber those that are reasoned and substantial by a fair margin.

People want simple answers to complex issues, whether it's the team they're following or the community they live in. The unfortunate reality is that we're probably at one of those social watershed moments , where the schism between the cognitive development of one section of the public and the other is growing by leaps and bounds; we have more brilliant people now than ever before, but we also have more ignorance striking out at reason and intelligence than ever before, due to social orthodoxy and the threats imposed upon it by the information age.

So, the next time you see someone whose first response to a problem is "fire the coach!", consider that he's probably the same idiot who writes to the Sun and says the easiest way to curb crime is to start executing people. Simple, socially disconnected, eventually irrelevant.

fo sho bredrin

VPjr
08-11-2008, 09:46 PM
The changes that would make me happy are pretty easy insofar as they only involve money:

- increase roster sizes to 30 players from 24
- increase salary cap to a minimum of $4 million
- reduce the cap hit teams take when signing DPs from $400K to $300K and allow teams to sign up to 3 DPs per team (no trading of DP slots though and each team must sign at least 1)
- increase minimum salary for Dev Players from $14K to $21K (50% increase) and increase minimum salart for Senior Roster players to $45K to $50K per season.
- Have Canadians count as domestic players, equal in status to US born players.
- eliminate the silly allocation rules and eliminate the draft altogether.

James17930
08-11-2008, 10:43 PM
I'm too lazy to go back and the the comment and quote it, but someone said the league should create a mandatory youth development system.

Well, they did. All MLS clubs must now have a youth development program. TFC was given an exception where they didn't have to have it the first year, but had to by the second (witness the birth of the Academy).

Billy the kid
08-12-2008, 08:38 AM
I've always found it ironic that a lot of soccer "purists" used to complain that North America would not accept soccer. Then when North American league was developed, they rip it to shreds. Having said that, people can and should complain about bad officiating as well as other problems with the league, just as people should and do complain about the problems with European leagues.

Damien
08-12-2008, 08:53 AM
Attendance is bound to increase over time. It's best for the MLS to cater to kids in the states for now and slowly change their marketing plan to young adults.

You can't cater to adults now as they've already made up their mind on Baseball/Basketball/(college)Football.

Better and more well known players will come from Canada/USA and will make the game look more attractive eventually.

And the last problem is media attention, which again will come with time (hopefully).

Beach_Red
08-12-2008, 09:01 AM
And the last problem is media attention, which again will come with time (hopefully).

Oh, it will. Media attention will follow sponsorship and that's really starting to pick up.

keem-o-sabi
08-12-2008, 09:06 AM
Well I think the new CBA will solve a lot of player salary problems that are associated with MLS. We should actually be able to keep players instead of them going onto the Norway/Danish/Swedish leagues for a little bit more money. We need competition for spots, and by allowing our average players to leave for more money, the younger players are just coming in and taking spots (they don't have to really compete for them as hard as they should in my opinion and become better professionals). Hopefully the discover claim thing and allocation monies thing can be resolved too. That is the dumbest thing ever (discovery claim).

It's a problem that we have in the US (yes I'm a yank living in Canada) where all these youngsters keep coming up into MLS and really don't develop that well as they are handed starting spots and not have to work for them because the average joe has left the team for the other side of the pond (only to return a couple years later anyway).

I don't mind the other silly 'americanization' of the league too much. Yes I would love to have a single table with the winner based on league play not a 3-4 week stretch were a team can suck all year and go on a nice run, ala LA Galaxy a couple years back.

Slowly the league is evolving and believe me, the Don has done wonders. I don't know how many of you followed MLS before TFC came around, but I did religiously. I worked in soccer marketing down in Maryland, was part of the group that launched the 90:00 Minutes magazine that's still around, ran MLS fantasy leagues, etc. So although it may not be europe, it is still a good product.

Someone mentioned that euro soccer fans aren't interested in MLS because of the rules. I think that there are Eurosnobs everywhere and they will always be that way. MLS is probably never going to be at the level they want it to be at in their lifetimes. Even if MLS got rid of the Salary Cap and let every team do what they want, they'd still say MLS is inferior.

I_AM_CANADIAN
08-12-2008, 01:01 PM
I'm getting pretty tired of every single thread on this board having some comment along the lines of 'stupid MLS, blah, blah, blah' or 'Don Garber is a moron, blah blah blah'. The MLS existing at all, and providing a sustainable scaffolding for North American football, is a small miracle, and is the result of hundreds of millions of dollars of investment at the public and private levels and countless careers and man hours of work in the face of incredible hurdles and skepticism. Certainly nobody is getting rich off this league. Yet, listening to some on this board, it seems like everyone involved in the league should be grateful that sophisticated European football watchers here in Toronto have condescended to watch a few games.


Look at the problems in European football:

A few big teams win *everything*. How is this sustainable? Not only do the elite teams constantly destroy everyone else, but they use their influence to pry players away from their home clubs and exert influence over referees and officials. Sport should be about a level playing field, and the European leagues are anything but.

Match fixing. From the biggest league to the smallest, match fixing is a repeated problem all across the continent. This is a huge problem, but seems to be accepted as part of the business.

Transfer anarchy. The typical transfer process in Europe involves greedy agents, compliant newspapers, corrupt managers and jerk-ass narcissistic players (err, 'slaves'). This is what we are aspiring to?

Owner insanity. Corrupt Russian douchebags, criminal politicians, debt-ridden flippers and Ken Bates. What else has to be said?


Compare this to MLS, which has good parity between the teams, so half the games aren't already decided before they start, and good ownership, so as long as there is some fan support, the franchises are stable. The player allocation process supports parity, but still allows smart clubs who allocate their cap dollars and scouting resources well to have long-term success. MLS certainly needs to improve in a lot of areas, but in the most important ones, quality of play and fan experience, the league is growing organically, if slowly, and is is a pretty good place for being less than fifteen years old.


It's hard to build something good from nothing, and easy to crap over someone else's efforts. I'm disappointed that so many on this board (and I know not everyone is like this) choose simple-minded cynicism and negativity over more moderate and nuanced discussion over MLS's present and future.

I agree almost completely with you. The English game is such a mess these days, four teams have all the money and as a result teams a hundred years old in lower leagues are going into administration. As well as a zillion other problems.

A lot of people on here think that unless our league is exactly like the Premiership/Serie A/La Primera Liga/whatever, it doesn't count as a "real" football league. It's the whole TSN/Sportsnet effect, you're only exposed to a handful of the top teams in the world, and what you don't realize is that there are only a small handful of teams in the world that have that kind of money and that kind of state-of-the-art ground and those kind of amazingly talented players. Having never talked to fans of smaller clubs, they don't realize that 98% of the teams in world football have it much worse than Toronto FC and MLS do. And the majority of the aforementioned teams and leagues are a hundred or more years old. For a league that's what, twelve years old now, MLS is doing pretty well. And as for Garber, he's a genius in my opinion, he realized that Canadians will support professional football if they're give a chance and a team in a decent sized league, he brought in the designated player rule, he got rid of MLS teams that were losing money and had no fans, in general he's been the reason MLS is growing as quickly as it is today.

As for the salary cap, they do have to raise it, but there's no way they can absolutely get rid of it anytime in the near future. They don't have the kind of media attention and fan support to justify giving clubs free reign to spend so much money, it'll be a few years yet before we see players making as much as they could in Europe.

jloome
08-12-2008, 01:03 PM
It's a problem that we have in the US (yes I'm a yank living in Canada) where all these youngsters keep coming up into MLS and really don't develop that well as they are handed starting spots and not have to work for them because the average joe has left the team for the other side of the pond (only to return a couple years later anyway).

The short rosters don't help much, either. 18-man, compared with 22-25 in Euro leagues? Tha'ts a biiiiig difference in depth and it means a lot of unseason rookies getting playing time when they're just not ready.

I_AM_CANADIAN
08-12-2008, 01:04 PM
QFT. I've been to games in Buffalo that have had more Leaf fans in attendance than Sabers fans. :canada:

I agree with that, I've been to a few Leaf games in Buffalo, you get a better atmosphere for Leafs games in Buffalo sadly than you do at the ACC, because only the real fans are willing to make the trip. You don't get the massive prawn sandwich brigade that fills up the whole lower bowl in Toronto.

OneLoveOneEric
08-12-2008, 01:09 PM
I have to say that IMO, parity is only good if the level of play is high. Take the NHL for example, the latest league to jump on the parity bandwagon. I don't find it exciting that 8 teams with zero chance of progressing through the playoffs battle for 3 playoff spots at the end of the season. Who cares? It might make hockey pools more interesting, but the "parity" is a total illusion. There are still only a small group of teams with a real chance at the cup. I'd rather the talent was more concentrated in those teams, so that semi's and finals could be played with more talent on the ice.
It doesn't matter if 10 shitty teams finish within 2 points of each other at the end of the season. They're still shitty teams, and just because the league throws points around like confetti for tieing and losing games doesn't change that.
Ditto for MLS. If shitty teams are in the league, that's fine with me. I'd rather see the top level continue to increase even if that involves other teams being left behind.

I_AM_CANADIAN
08-12-2008, 01:14 PM
I find the NHL to be boooooring these days to be honest. The MLS has parity because they need a low salary cap to survive, but if I had the choice, I'd prefer a league where teams have free reign, and the teams that can pull in the most fans therefore have the most money to spend. These days the (NHL) Eastern Conference has 15 teams at varying levels of mediocrity battling for every spot. The Western Conference has maybe three good teams, a few mediocre teams, then a bunch of extremely sh*tty teams at the very bottom. No team in the NHL today would even have a fighting chance if you stuck them in the NHL of 1996 or 1997.

brad
08-12-2008, 01:28 PM
I'd rather see the top level continue to increase even if that involves other teams being left behind.

And what if we are one of the teams that get left behind?

Shaughno
08-12-2008, 01:32 PM
^^ Given the backing we have, we should be left behind. If we are, then we need to ask some serious questions.

OneLoveOneEric
08-12-2008, 01:36 PM
And what if we are one of the teams that get left behind?

That's OK with me. We'd have to fight our way out of the shit, and it would take time, but hopefully we'd do it.

brad
08-12-2008, 01:41 PM
^^ Given the backing we have, we should be left behind. If we are, then we need to ask some serious questions.

I agree with that, but I could argue the other side of the coin - the place is packed with a long waiting list despite a mediocre team, why invest big money in players.

I don't want crack open that whole debate again of success vs future attendance, just raising the point.