Will the MLS or Chinese Super League ever become more than glorified pub leagues?

  • The Fighting Cock is a forum for fans of Tottenham Hotspur Football Club. Here you can discuss Spurs latest matches, our squad, tactics and any transfer news surrounding the club. Registration gives you access to all our forums (including 'Off Topic' discussion) and removes most of the adverts (you can remove them all via an account upgrade). You're here now, you might as well...

    Get involved!

Nashville hired Ian Ayre to run the club...welp, I guess that puts an early end to my third attempt to drum up legitimate personal investment in the MLS. US football remains firmly within the exploitative grasp of “useless cunts with accents”.

:pochshock:
 
The problems that will always impact the MSL versus most other US sports is that it can't be controlled through salary caps, regulation, or by the US media ....

Football is a world sport, no one country (or even national organisation) can set all the rules ... feck in 50 years they still can't all agree on the standard pitch size ...

The reason there are no salary caps, that there are promotion and relegation, that there are independent national leagues is that players are not 'owned' by clubs the same way they are in the NFL or NBA, they are fully covered by standard employment legislation and freedom of movement ...

If the EPL places a hard salary cap on it's clubs all the best players would immediately tear up their contracts and feck off to a country that pays more, nothing the owners could do ... this scares the shite out of the US owners ... not being able to control your players as personal property (I will avoid the 's' word) means you're taking a huge risk ... buy an NFL or NBA franchise and you are guaranteed to make money ... that just doesn't apply to MLS ...

The USA is the only country in the crazy world of NFL / NBA ... but in Football (soccer) it's just a small player ... if it wants to compete, and it does, it has no choice but to follow what the rest of the football world does ... you can't have a 'single tier' league and hope to be competitive ... there's a reason no other country does this ... football needs grass roots, it needs a National Team, those successes are vital, feck England still harp on about 1966 because that victory took English football to a whole new level ... the USA needs more 'grass roots' football, it needs more International success, they have the players they just need a break ...

That all sounds a bit negative but it really isn't, previous 'failed' attempts with single tier soccer attempting to mimic other US sports have always gone a bit wrong, not failed but not quite taken off ... now that there are clear signs of 'league' structures growing beneath the MLS things will improve ... that is the future and it will happen ...
 

Juicy Sushi

Evil Numbers Enthusiast
The problems that will always impact the MSL versus most other US sports is that it can't be controlled through salary caps, regulation, or by the US media ....

Football is a world sport, no one country (or even national organisation) can set all the rules ... feck in 50 years they still can't all agree on the standard pitch size ...

The reason there are no salary caps, that there are promotion and relegation, that there are independent national leagues is that players are not 'owned' by clubs the same way they are in the NFL or NBA, they are fully covered by standard employment legislation and freedom of movement ...

If the EPL places a hard salary cap on it's clubs all the best players would immediately tear up their contracts and feck off to a country that pays more, nothing the owners could do ... this scares the shite out of the US owners ... not being able to control your players as personal property (I will avoid the 's' word) means you're taking a huge risk ... buy an NFL or NBA franchise and you are guaranteed to make money ... that just doesn't apply to MLS ...

The USA is the only country in the crazy world of NFL / NBA ... but in Football (soccer) it's just a small player ... if it wants to compete, and it does, it has no choice but to follow what the rest of the football world does ... you can't have a 'single tier' league and hope to be competitive ... there's a reason no other country does this ... football needs grass roots, it needs a National Team, those successes are vital, feck England still harp on about 1966 because that victory took English football to a whole new level ... the USA needs more 'grass roots' football, it needs more International success, they have the players they just need a break ...

That all sounds a bit negative but it really isn't, previous 'failed' attempts with single tier soccer attempting to mimic other US sports have always gone a bit wrong, not failed but not quite taken off ... now that there are clear signs of 'league' structures growing beneath the MLS things will improve ... that is the future and it will happen ...
I don't think so. If you read the history of how the game evolved, promotion/relegation was accidental, and a holdover from the amateur era. I don't see it as required for football, however much we enjoy that aspect.
 
I don't think so. If you read the history of how the game evolved, promotion/relegation was accidental, and a holdover from the amateur era. I don't see it as required for football, however much we enjoy that aspect.

It's not required but it's what makes 55,000 players play pro football compared to just 1,700 playing NFL ... it's why football is regularly watched by 700 million people a week with 4 billion watching the last world cup finals ... meanwhile NFL is somewhere near 100m and dropping fast ...

Why? ... because Football is inspirational, as a fan my team whoever I support could one day become league champions, win the FA Cup, play in International competitions, sure it's not likely but it's possible, it's also aspirational as a player, a player could play lower league football for years before making that leap to the top tier ... Ian Wright, Vardy, etc

If you take away the opportunity to 'climb the ladder' then everything below tier one just withers and dies ... for example just how many pro American Football teams are there in the US outside of the NFL?

In NFL you can pick the this years Superbowl winners from 32 teams and next years, next decades etc. ... even worse as a player if you don't make the grade in college you will 99.9% never be a pro-player ...

Take away the inspiration and take away the aspiration and you're left with not much more than a bunch of overpaid 'we were stars once' and underpaid 'not quite good enough' footballers playing in a league that's been going nowhere for years ...

If you don't believe that the just look how 'soccer' has done in it's various incarnations in the US over the last 50 years ... a first world country with 330m people that can't produce 11 players to beat countries a tenth of their size? clearly something ain't working ...
 
Seems like typical American arrogance to do it their own way ! Ridiculous to have a closed league.
The desire by owners for a closed European super league pre-dates the formation of the Premier League, the idea has just never been popular enough among fans and far too complicated to set up. This is just the same bullshit by people involved in the sport to make money that has been peddled for decades.
 
It's not required but it's what makes 55,000 players play pro football compared to just 1,700 playing NFL ... it's why football is regularly watched by 700 million people a week with 4 billion watching the last world cup finals ... meanwhile NFL is somewhere near 100m and dropping fast ...

Why? ... because Football is inspirational, as a fan my team whoever I support could one day become league champions, win the FA Cup, play in International competitions, sure it's not likely but it's possible, it's also aspirational as a player, a player could play lower league football for years before making that leap to the top tier ... Ian Wright, Vardy, etc

If you take away the opportunity to 'climb the ladder' then everything below tier one just withers and dies ... for example just how many pro American Football teams are there in the US outside of the NFL?

In NFL you can pick the this years Superbowl winners from 32 teams and next years, next decades etc. ... even worse as a player if you don't make the grade in college you will 99.9% never be a pro-player ...

Take away the inspiration and take away the aspiration and you're left with not much more than a bunch of overpaid 'we were stars once' and underpaid 'not quite good enough' footballers playing in a league that's been going nowhere for years ...

If you don't believe that the just look how 'soccer' has done in it's various incarnations in the US over the last 50 years ... a first world country with 330m people that can't produce 11 players to beat countries a tenth of their size? clearly something ain't working ...
Your initial comparison is a bit apples and oranges though - you’re comparing the global number of players in a sport that’s by far the most popular in the world to the number of players from a single league in a single country in sport that’s far less globally popular.

If you consider that the only players in English football who are making an honest living wage at sport are in the league, you arrive at something on the order of ~1700 truly professional players in England. Then consider that you also have the CFL, AFL, and 2 new spring leagues on the horizon, and also that there are larger coaching, front office, medical, training, and equipment staffs in American football compared to football (especially throwing in college and high level high school) and you’re getting very close to per capita parity in the people who make their living off of the two sports.

Furthermore, financially, the median wage of the NFL is about $800k. Outside of the PL the median wage in English football plummets. Even the $2.4M median wage of the PL is heavily doped by a few “rogue” clubs at the top. Salaries are collectively bargained in the NFL at roughly 47% of revenue - a mark no English club is staying within while many are recklessly spending (including several whose wages account for greater than 100% of revenue). The wages in English, and many other European leagues, is simply unsustainable outside of the charity of ownership. At the same time success in European football, except for the very top clubs, is basically unobtainable without spending outside your financial means.

A closed league guarantees a few things. First, your club can’t and won’t ever become Leeds or Portsmouth - generationally burned to the ground by reckless finances. It also offers greater parity by limiting spending to reasonable levels, bolstered by more even financing between clubs - meaning that while the team you follow might not be down the street from your house, the team you support has a much more realistic chance of winning a championship each year.

And I think you’re over-glamorizing the “local club” aspect of football. The vast majority of football fans do not primarily support the club geographically nearest to them. Most Spurs supporters will pass one or more smaller clubs on their way to WHL for a match.

You’re also neglecting the fact that the US has a much more competitive sporting landscape than Europe. There’s more variety in the ways a person can make a living in athletics. Just in team sports football and cricket compared to NFL, CFL, NBA, MLB, NHL, MLS (all closed leagues). Don’t decry a lack of opportunities for American athletes.

I’m sorry, but promotion/relegation, in the end has no real impact on the following of the sport. It’s the most globally popular sport because it’s by far the most easily accessible sport in the planet. You need nothing but a bit of an open patch and a ball to play, and you can play on the street with a makeshift wad of cloth in the poorest part of the world if need be. On top of that, you don’t even need other people involved to enjoy kicking a spherical object about. That’s why it’s been exported so successfully.

At the end, no one buys a ticket for Eynesbury Rovers because they think the club could one day be in the PL.
 
I dont think the MLS is far away from being a top league TBH.

Firstly the point of relegation and promotion. The point the MLS makes is its hard to attract investors when there is the risk that the club goes down after all the investment. I think when the league is in its infancy it needs investment, and if that attracts more investment, then so be it. Once the clubs and fan bases are established then you can add promotion relegation. The fans are already hooked and wont switch allegiance, stop coming.

Secondly the point about competition from NFL, NHL, NBA and MLB. Soccer only needs to be a niche sport in a country as rich and as populous as the USA to be better than Ligue 1 or Serie A IMO. MLS attendences are already better than Ligue 1 and close to Serie A. Only difference is the TV deal.

The only thing stopping the MLS really taking off is the salary cap. For the moment the owners are raking it in rather than the players. Atlanta has a 13m dollar payroll yet averaging 50k a game. Maybe 3-5m a game in revenue.

I think the game in the USA will take time to grow slowly and then just explode in a matter of 5 or 6 years as TV money increases, better players move there and tv money increases more.
 

ShutUpPatrik

Supporter
Now I'm a big fat dynamo!
Ezequel Barco is was highly rated too before he moved to Atlanta. Good to see an MLS team investing in young players rather than the Rooneys and Beckhams.
We had Walkes over there on loan last season as well and he spoke very warmly about his experience.

I have no problem with a few senior players moving there (Rooney, Zlatan, Gusan etc) since it will help somewhat with raising awareness for the league. but younger/less established players need to be given the spotlight so the league and teams can create stars of their own. From my limited experience most teams seem to be doing that well bar a few
 
I dont think the MLS is far away from being a top league TBH.

Firstly the point of relegation and promotion. The point the MLS makes is its hard to attract investors when there is the risk that the club goes down after all the investment. I think when the league is in its infancy it needs investment, and if that attracts more investment, then so be it. Once the clubs and fan bases are established then you can add promotion relegation. The fans are already hooked and wont switch allegiance, stop coming.

Secondly the point about competition from NFL, NHL, NBA and MLB. Soccer only needs to be a niche sport in a country as rich and as populous as the USA to be better than Ligue 1 or Serie A IMO. MLS attendences are already better than Ligue 1 and close to Serie A. Only difference is the TV deal.

The only thing stopping the MLS really taking off is the salary cap. For the moment the owners are raking it in rather than the players. Atlanta has a 13m dollar payroll yet averaging 50k a game. Maybe 3-5m a game in revenue.

I think the game in the USA will take time to grow slowly and then just explode in a matter of 5 or 6 years as TV money increases, better players move there and tv money increases more.
The difference between the MLS and 2nd tier Euro leagues will always be the Champions League and endorsements. The profile playing for AC Milan brings will be higher for the foreseeable future, regardless of attendances or wages.

And until the league develops players that go on to play for Madrid, Bayern, Barca and the other big-money "destination" clubs then Ligue 1 and Serie A will continue to be considered a superior path.

Regarding the salary cap, it's the only thing preventing the league from going tits-up like the NASL. The league is a massive loss leader, the clubs, despite attendances, are financial black holes. The only thing that keeps it afloat are the ever-increasing expansion fees collected from men betting on that eventually massive TV contract. Which probably isn't coming.
 
Top Bottom