MLS Ranks Shockingly Low in IFFHS Study

[DOMIN8R]

When I first saw this I didn't know if I should laugh, cry or go postal.

"For years MLS’ proponents have claimed the league is among the most competitive in the world and have generally assigned a ranking to the league somewhere in the 15th-25th range worldwide. I have myself in the past partook in such madness until I realized all such analysis are subjective and it appeared MLS was not making the grade."

More here:http://www.majorleaguesoccertalk.com...ffhs-study/647

Remember. Don't shoot the messenger.

[rocker]

well i can say right now I've watched the Australian league games on TV and no way in hell is that league of a higher quality than MLS.

so the ranking is flawed.

[Billy the kid]

I don't know a lot about many of those leagues, but I can't say it's that surprising. A rise in the cap of a couple million would raise the ranking fairly significantly. Eventually that will happen.

[RedRum]

Interesting. By that same ranking system I think the USL would rank far ahead of MLS as well, simply due to the Limp Act progressing as far as they have in the CCL.

[olegunnar]

Here's the key paragraph


"A large part of the formula for determining the strongest leagues by the IFFHS is performance by domestic teams when entered in continental competitions. The CONCACAF Champions Cup and Champions League are factored into this survey, but Superliga which was won by an MLS side is not. International friendlies such as the Chicago Fire’s 2-0 victory over Everton are not factored into the formula either. Honduran and Guatemalan teams are helped by playing in preliminary rounds of tournaments that MLS and Costa Rican teams gets byes through."

[Hitcho]

Meh. This kind of list is ridiculously subjective, despite their attempts to make the ranking system credible. How can you seriously rank leagues like that? I mean, if Seattle signed Henry, would MLS suddenly go up to 60 something, and if not why not given he's still among the very best players in the world? It's a joke.

Besides, the only statistic that really matters for a young league like MLS is how quickly it's growing, which is pretty good at the moment. As long as it stays on a decent upswing for a while the rest should take of itself. More money will come in leading to a higher cap, better players will follow, and higher credence will follow after that.

[Billy the kid]

I don't know about all of you, but I've got my eyes firmly set on 76th place. You better watch your back Algeria!!!

[I_AM_CANADIAN]

This looks about as credible as FIFA rankings... I'ts just manipulation of statistics, and as shown above, it would seem that some competitions are arbitrarily included or not included. And oh, shock, the beloved Premier League ranks number one. Who could have predicted that? The fact that the Guatemalan league (didn't know there was one) ranks higher than a league which recently had a player leave for 5 million pounds to Villareal speaks volumes about how seriously I take this 'study.'

[flatpicker]

1. raise the cap
2. make MLS into a single table
3. get all teams into soccer specific stadiums
4. ditch the SuperLiga and concentrate on Champions League
5. with the addition of a few more teams, break the MLS into 1st and 2nd divisions
^ that move, as has been discussed in other threads, would create more competition in the league
6. following #5, I would allow all teams into an MLS Cup playoff series which would put more value on regular season champ.


- but to be honest... the rankings list is crap... but I stand by the above points as things needed in MLS.

[Beach_Red]

Meh. This kind of list is ridiculously subjective, despite their attempts to make the ranking system credible. How can you seriously rank leagues like that? I mean, if Seattle signed Henry, would MLS suddenly go up to 60 something, and if not why not given he's still among the very best players in the world? It's a joke.

Besides, the only statistic that really matters for a young league like MLS is how quickly it's growing, which is pretty good at the moment. As long as it stays on a decent upswing for a while the rest should take of itself. More money will come in leading to a higher cap, better players will follow, and higher credence will follow after that.

You're right. Check back in ten years, see where it is then.

[Billy the kid]

1. raise the cap
2. make MLS into a single table
3. get all teams into soccer specific stadiums
4. ditch the SuperLiga and concentrate on Champions League
5. with the addition of a few more teams, break the MLS into 1st and 2nd divisions
^ that move, as has been discussed in other threads, would create more competition in the league
6. following #5, I would allow all teams into an MLS Cup playoff series which would put more value on regular season champ.


- but to be honest... the rankings list is crap... but I stand by the above points as things needed in MLS.

I wish they would ditch Superliga too, apparently it's a money maker for the league. I don't think the league has a financial stake in the champions league, so I don't think they see it as a high priority.

[Hitcho]

1. raise the cap
2. make MLS into a single table
3. get all teams into soccer specific stadiums
4. ditch the SuperLiga and concentrate on Champions League
5. with the addition of a few more teams, break the MLS into 1st and 2nd divisions
^ that move, as has been discussed in other threads, would create more competition in the league
6. following #5, I would allow all teams into an MLS Cup playoff series which would put more value on regular season champ.


- but to be honest... the rankings list is crap... but I stand by the above points as things needed in MLS.

Flat Picker Man speaks great wisdom. My only change would be to drop the word "play off" from the cup competition, and keep it as a straight knockout cup competition which both leagues are entered into on a random basis and have it progress over the course of the season, called the MLS Cup. Instead of a meaningless first overall place between the two conferences (based on uneven matches over the season), you'd get two league champions and a cup winner all with much kudos attached, all safely confined within the MLS blanket (so it looks and feels like a mini english league, but it really isn't, because all teams get the same money, no-one can be releagted out of the lower league and the draft still favours teams in reverse order).

[Shakes McQueen]

I'm pretty sure this is the ranking list that also put Argentina's domestic league above Spain's La Liga, Germany's Bundesliga, and the Netherlands' Eredivisie.

In other words, it's a joke.

- Scott

[Steve]

Haha, that has to be the silliest usage of data I've ever seen. Let's put it this way.

The only way leagues are ranked are via international competitions. This is a silly way to rank a league, as a league with a single team (or however many teams get in to the competition) that's great would be ranked over a league where all teams are SLIGHTY worse. AKA, it rewards huge gaps in talent.

It also gives points to a league for winning any games. That means by giving MLS a bye, it just means it will win fewer games (granted the games earlier would be worth less, but if MLS teams fail out early, that doesn't help).

Thirdly, MLS teams have a lack of depth. We know that. That means the teams have to make choices on which games to try to win. Right now, the least important games for most teams is the champions league.

Essentially, the data here is being manipulated to say something it just doesn't say. I'm not saying MLS is a top league, but ranked this low? Not even maybe.

[billyfly]

This is the 3rd thread on this granted the second was really FIFA's ranking and not the IFFHS.

[Roogsy]

That is a ridiculous ranking. It may not be top 10 but this ranking is obviously a farce.

[Cashcleaner]

1. raise the cap
2. make MLS into a single table
3. get all teams into soccer specific stadiums
4. ditch the SuperLiga and concentrate on Champions League
5. with the addition of a few more teams, break the MLS into 1st and 2nd divisions
^ that move, as has been discussed in other threads, would create more competition in the league
6. following #5, I would allow all teams into an MLS Cup playoff series which would put more value on regular season champ.


- but to be honest... the rankings list is crap... but I stand by the above points as things needed in MLS.

These sort of ratings are so nitpicky at times, its really hard to make an arbtirary ruling over which league is superior. Personally, I don't see MLS/USA as bad as 77th place.

Fact 1: Raising the cap and league minimum salary will encourage domestic players to stay here rather than make a move overseas to play. It will also give clubs more buying power to entice foreign players to come here as well.

Fact 2: Superliga has to go. The CONCACAF Champions League is the wave of the future and MLS needs to recognise the supremacy of our confederation's premier club competition. As someone mentioned; its a moneymaker for the league, but not so much for the clubs and players themselves.

Fact 3: A multi-tier league would be great to see, but will never happen barring a major shift in sport and business attitudes on the continent.

Of course, there's several other good ideas, but I think getting on top of the ones I mentioned above would be a good start.

[Brooker]

i know we're growing and thats all that really matters to me. if MLS is taken this lightly 5 or 6 years from now, then i might see a reason to go ballistic on whoever made that list.

[Cashcleaner]

^ I know what you're saying, but I'm starting to get tired of the whole "we're still a young league" sorta talk. 15 years can be a lifetime in the business world and I think we'd be better served if we try to shed our persona as an up-and-coming entity in North American sports. Don't get me wrong, we're young by the standards of the NHL, MLB, and various other soccer leagues around the world, but we can only use the excuse of being new to the game for so long.

BTW: Not trying to sound harsh here and I'm not criticising your post, Brooker. I just had to say it 'cuase it's been building up for some time.

[Hitcho]

^ I agree with you Cash, because for one thing, the more we paint the league as an undeveloped experiment, the les likely players are to want to come here from outside Namerica.

Having said that, saw-ker as a sport in the US will always, always be playing catch up with th big boys and will never achieve parity (at elast, not in our lifetimes). So if MLS thinks it can grow the sport by leaning on the "developing game" crutch for a bit longer, you can see why they'd do it.

[Beach_Red]

^ I know what you're saying, but I'm starting to get tired of the whole "we're still a young league" sorta talk. 15 years can be a lifetime in the business world and I think we'd be better served if we try to shed our persona as an up-and-coming entity in North American sports. Don't get me wrong, we're young by the standards of the NHL, MLB, and various other soccer leagues around the world, but we can only use the excuse of being new to the game for so long.

BTW: Not trying to sound harsh here and I'm not criticising your post, Brooker. I just had to say it 'cuase it's been building up for some time.

Yes, MLS can only use the, "we're a young league," excuse for so long - once the expansion is done, maybe a couple more years after that for every team to settle, then that's it.

And as for a multi-tiered league, I think from the investors' point of view, it has to be either multi-tiered or raise the cap, but it's unlikely many owners will ever want to get into a bidding war league that includes relegation, it's a recipe for four or five teams to dominate.