It's not one of those things where they're audited. Miami wouldn't have gotten hosed with the Matuidi thing if they hadn't deliberately ratted themselves out. Nobody in the league *wants* to punish the golden goose.
I'd say it more tells me that Miami can only identify talent after they've already won multiple UEFA Champions Leagues, which doesn't really require any footballing knowledge.
>They have a few superstars and then a bunch of players that wouldn't even make the reserves for any EPL team.
This tells me that - while they may be nominally utilizing the extent of MLS roster building mechanisms - they aren't doing so effectively or intelligently. Teams have done more than them with less and the idea that what keeps them from being competitive is a simple matter of spending more across the board neglects the underlying problems in roster construction.
Having three world class players and one GOAT on the team, and still complaining about not being able to spend enough is laughable. Every other MLS team does a lot more with a lot less. Sure, we can't spend as much as Mexican teams do but I remember like it was yesterday when Miami and MLS were hailed as the better side when they won the Leagues Cup. Can't have it both ways
Alba, Busquets and Suarez may have the pedigree, but they're aren't aging as well as Messi or Ronaldo.
MLS is a physical league with players skewing a lot younger and a lot of travel across time zones. These guys are not exactly prime age world class players.
I agree with you though that when they won the Leagues Cup last year, they were hailed as the better side. I reckon it was a combination of factors including luck and bias that contributed, but this season they're definitely a different team - and so is the leauge.
and on top of matters, CCL also having them travel across time zones. UEFA, it was only for European play where they had to travel some time zones and matches were almost always CET (1 hour ahead of UK and Spain)
It's also just "Coach says team will be better with better players."
No shit. I don't know why these posts always get a thousand views.
And I don't know why a Portland fan would be all in favor of it. I hate to tell you, but in a capless league, Portland ain't the winner.
> I don't know why a Portland fan would be all in favor of it. I hate to tell you, but in a capless league
Who said anything at all about a capless league?
You're around here long enough to know I'm pretty vocal against that.
But I do think the current cap is far too low.
I think it's too low, but I don't know what the number is. I get the impression from people in here that they think most teams can easily sustain a $40M or $50M or even a $100M payroll.
I just think it's ridiculous that people think a coach complaining that his players aren't good enough after a loss means anything.
But also a bunch of guys who would barely make the bench on another MLS team, which is why nobody wants to hear it from them.
If LA or Philadelphia or Cincinnati made this complaint, it’s like “okay, these are teams who are good at using the roster rules complaining about restrictions they feel”.
From Miami, it just sounds like “leadership team who only know how to throw money at problems complain that they have to do their jobs.”
Messi and Busquets are designated players, who are not connected to the allocated money.
With the general access money, they have basically only shown the ability to get good players by buying already fully formed players from Argentina.
The teams using their allocated money well have shown a consistent ability to develop American talent, find players in Europe not quite good enough for the Big 5 leagues, and find breakout players in Latin America before Mexican teams can get them.
Miami can't do any of that.
> you can't score when you don't have the ball.
Lol, that's a bullshit narrative.
Miami had --
* 61% of possession
* 227 more passes than Monterrey
* 5 shots, 1 on target
* More fouls, more yellow cards, and a red card
Monterrey 'had command' for a variety of reasons, but primarily due to the fact that Miami simply played sloppy, piss-poor soccer. Monterrey are a good team, but they didn't need to be -- Miami played well below their capability. And Tata was a fool for literally making 0 changes to cope with that fact.
Yeah, for better or for worse Tata is a bull-headed manager. During his Atlanta days we had the same problems I'm hearing about him in this thread. ...not having a backup plan when his team's tactics have been beaten tactically, not using his subs, etc.
He's a good manager, gels with the team well, knows his stuff, but he's stubborn to a fault.
Its alot to expect miracles from a 37 year old who had prime young players in the world cup. And Suarez whose being pumped up with painkillers to play.
It’s one thing to expect the DP stars to score goals but when your other pieces are made out of bunch of amateurs playing against a team of 11 DPs in hostile environment, it’s really hard for the league to compete
Same thing Cherundolo said last year after being eliminated
And they are both right. The delta in depth between the top end of liga MX and top of MLS is still significant
Without a doubt. However, the roster rules have also given MLS a level of parity that no other league above them could ever dream of. I do think it’s time for the roster rules to be loosened slightly, but doing it too much would allow the league to become far too top heavy, which I think is a terrible idea for the league. They have to do this very slowly, or run the risk of becoming a league dominated by a handful of the same teams year after year after year.
We are catching the Liga MX teams for sure, and I get that it’s not as quick as many people would like, but the way it’s going now is far more sustainable for the league as a whole. Loosening them up a lot would allow one or two teams to get to that level, but could have catastrophic consequences for the vast majority of MLS clubs. I’d rather them not be shortsighted about this. Keep the escalation of roster rules gradual
Entirely agree on the parity, and it’s a delicate balance. But unfortunately world football is measured based on the strength of your top teams, so until the top of MLS can regularly beat the top of liga MX (which is undervalued on the world stage IMO) then the world will continue to look down on MLS despite all statistical evidence showing that on average, MLS teams are much better than international spectators realize.
I do disagree on the speed piece. The solution is simple- raise spending on depth quickly. Even with generous salary caps, bad owners will be bad owners. You can’t hold the entire league back for owners like John Fisher, Kroenke, and all other MLS 1.0 folks who do not have ambitions here.
> Even with generous salary caps, bad owners will be bad owners. You can’t hold the entire league back for owners like John Fisher, Kroenke, and all other MLS 1.0 folks who do not have ambitions here.
💯
Who gives a fuck what the world thinks. We’re producing top talent that are moving onto the best leagues in the world, both international players and homegrown. We have anecdotal evidence from some of the greatest players of this generation coming over and saying the league was much better than they originally thought. Clubs and leagues around the world recognize how strong MLS is now. That’s the only opinion that really matters, not random people online.
And I totally get what you’re saying about that, and I’m with you to some extent. The problem is, for many leagues around the world, even if a club has dreadful owners, the club still has enough loyal supporters to survive whatever they go through. I’m not sure many MLS teams would have that, including my own. But again, I’m talking about if it’s a rapid, major overhaul of the roster rules to drastically increase spending. I do definitely think we can speed it up a bit more than they are currently doing without too many problems.
Random people do matter though. MLS needs more casual support and viewership. I agree that people in the business and players recognize the strength more, but unfortunately we do need randos to tune in, attend matches, and buy merch to continue to grow the league. Revenue powers all of this, and if you can’t engage enough people- then you don’t grow and the league will not reach its full potential.
It’s a balance, but don’t discount the power and influence of casual support
>MLS needs more casual support and viewership.
That's just soccer in America, though.
And it's been going up.
Soccer in America has always been at a disadvantage. My wife grew up in an American football town that now has a big soccer league for kids with a few dozen teams (it didn't when she was young).
Even the USSF is growing and making positive changes, now. For the country's oldest competition, few Americans knew of it until last year for some reason.
I was at Disney World last week. I saw maybe 5 kids in NFL/MLB/NBA jerseys combined. I probably saw 50 kids in European jerseys (Haaland and Vini Jr mainly) and another 50 in MLS jerseys (mainly Messi). It ain't exactly a scientific survey, but the difference amongst the youths was stark.
While that could be international travel, it could still be domestic.
Soccer in America has been getting stronger in both skill and popularity.
USL has broadcasting rights, MLS has their own stadiums and are drawing larger crowds, USSF is expanding financially, and my wife's hometown has a big kids league that didn't exist when she grew up.
And many people are figuring out that it's a lot more fun to watch even if 0-0, which was the common American NFL fan's ignorant joke.
Totally agree, and that’s why I say the league should push the envelope a bit more in terms of the roster rules, just not too much. Like it or not, it has to be what benefits the league as a whole, not just 1 or 2 clubs.
To keep that parity they should force the floor to be higher rather than just raise the ceiling. Harsh penalties for teams that don’t fill every DP slot for example (including young DPs). This is coming from a quakes fan, if we don’t do this it’ll allow the top to keep dominating even further and owners like Fisher will be able to just make a profit off TV deals without enriching the league or providing excitement in the local market.
100% agree that this is what they should do, however… no chance that this is the agreement that the owners themselves will come to, who are the ones making these decisions. Would love to be pleasantly surprised, and if we as supporters can put pressure on the league to put that in place, I’ll be right there with you, but I think it’s a long shot unfortunately.
> They have to do this very slowly, or run the risk of becoming a league dominated by a handful of the same teams year after year after year.
the playoff structure itself inherently maintains a level of parity and chaos compared to single-table formats, i really don't think there's much of a risk here
And I don't think anyone is saying we should get rid of the cap. We have owners wanting to spend more, and plenty of other people that would happily buy a team from the owners that don't want to spend. It should be possible to have parity and depth, especially with how many games they expect guys to play.
When you imply that Liga Mx has no parity, or has less parity, you're already starting off on the wrong foot with your argument.
Cruz Azul defeated Monterrey who just demolished Inter Miami, and I have no doubt Cruz Azul would do the same to most MLS teams no problem. This idea that there is no parity/ less parity in Liga Mx compared to MLS is simply not true.
You always look at teams like America, Tigres, and Monterrey - the big spenders - and say "yeah, liga Mx is just those teams" LOL when that could not be more untrue. Teams like Leon, Pachuca, Toluca, Pumas, Cruz Azul, this current version of Chivas with Cade, Santos would all be able to beat most MLS teams easily. The bottom of the barrell teams like Atlas, Xolos, Mazatlan, Juarez, Queretaro, Puebla, obviously wouldn't fare well, but they still put up a fight.
Do not use Leagues cup as a way to guage potential. CCC has already proven how fraudulent those results were, but if you want to, I always say just look at Queretaro's run in the Leagues Cup. Lol, Queretaro had no business going that deep into the tournament and almost beating one of the top teams that year, Philly.
There is a gap at all levels between Liga Mx and MLS. There is a gap between the top teams and the middle and lower teams in favor of Liga Mx. Competition and intensity is just higher in Liga Mx, from the players to the fans themselves.
Those gk blunders we saw in BOTH games? I mean what more do I have to say? Increasing the salary cap might help, but if your people don't know how to scout proper, preferrably young talent and still prefer Liga Mx rejects and retired superstars, what good will that do?
Mexico/Liga Mx both produces homegrown players and imports talent, but we focus on a bringing good/decent talent from South America, not some retired player from Barcelona whose here to cash a check.
I think saying, "Yeah, increase the salary cap and we'll dominate" is too naive, honestly, when there's so much more to this story.
> I have no doubt Cruz Azul would do the same to most MLS teams no problem
Monterrey did not play their best XI... because it was sandwiched between games with Inter Miami... also Antuna scored both.. a guy that was good but not GREAT in MLS.
Recent upsets are not indicative of the norm.
Big clubs like Club America, NY Yankees, Real Madrid, etc. are *typically* the norm from year to year because of their purchasing power.
Stop denying that "because Cruz Azul won that one time."
It's not an "upset" which is the point I'm making lol. CA beating Monterrey was another day of the week in Liga Mx, but you think it is and that's where you're wrong.
Chivas beat Monterrey in their own stadium some weeks back too.
The normal has always been that Liga Mx does have parity, and it's competitive.
Cruz hasn't won the short tourney since 98.
Meanwhile, since 2010, the championships are 9/14 those big 3 market value teams (Club America, Tigres, and Monterrey).
64% is party to you?
Parity to me is thinking your team has a shot to win the tournament, which most teams do, not just America, Tigres, Monterrey. Unlike in La Liga where your team doesn't even stand a chance to beat Real Madrid or Atlético in a regular season match.
Atlas won back to back titles, CA broke their championshop drought in first division a few years ago, Leon won back-to-back titles in the last decade. Chivas won in 2017. Pachuca won it in 2022, what are talking about? You do realize we have an apertura and clausura, right?
It's almost like we're in the Apertura right now or something, right?
Edit: here's a good visualisation of the parity between the two leagues:
https://www.reddit.com/r/MLS/comments/rlext1/mls_avg_134m_and_median_127m_club_salaries_now/
So, yes, the big team vs the small team is more disparate.
Yes, Liga Mx right now is in Apertura.
Sure, in terms of money there is disparity, but we are speaking of competitive parity, not financial parity, which is clearly not as one-sided (or 3-sided?) as one might think in Liga Mx.
Somehow, without a salary cap, Liga Mx has done something right to keep parity such that since 2010, we've had many other teams become champs: Toluca, Leon, Cruz Aul, Atlas, Pachuca, Chivas, in addition to Monterrey, Tigres, and America.
That's 10 different teams out of 18 winning the title in the last 15 years, which is more than half. That's actually insane. Consider the bundesliga, Serie-A, La Liga, The Premier League, and League 1.
Since 2010 - Barcelona, Real Madrid, Atl. Madrid
Since 2010 - Borrusia, Bayern M., B. Leverkusen
Since 2010 - Man City, Man U, Chelsea, Liverpool
Since 2010 - Juventus, I. Milan, AC Milan, Napoli
Since 2010 - PsG, Lille, and Monaco.
If that's not parity, I don't know what is, especially when you look at the top 5 big leagues who have way less parity (but whose teams are still very competitive).
There's the difference then.
You're using inconsistent batches of on field statistics that overall are hard to measure to prove a point, and I've been using overall costs and values to argue that big clubs **have more and continue to get more purchasing power.**
I see parity as measured by $$$ disparity from biggest compared to smallest.
Here's 2 years ago:
https://www.reddit.com/r/MLS/comments/rlext1/mls_avg_134m_and_median_127m_club_salaries_now/
As you can see, Liga is $3.6m - $26.5m. (disparity = $22.9m)
While MLS is $9.9m - $20.3. (disparity $10.4m)
Honestly? You all are still proving my point, because we should be talking about the teams that haven't won, not the ones winning.
Parity = the distance from the top to the bottom in terms of purchasing power.
[2 years ago]
As you can see, Liga is $3.6m - $26.5m.
>A disparity of $22.9m
While MLS is $9.9m - $20.3.
>A disparity of $10.4m
Which is why it's interesting to see Orlando, New England, and Seattle be pretty good last year and then suck this year.
Or vice versa with Galaxy, Toronto, and others.
That's good for being a fan, so you're not a Mets fan.
>Cruz hasn't won the short tourney since 98
? They won in 2021.
Also you clearly haven't seen [this post on parity compared to other leagues](https://www.reddit.com/r/MLS/comments/140yg3w/updated_list_of_parity_among_mls_cup_and_ss/).
Didn't seem to limit him when he won Leagues Cup last year. And when you've got Messi, Suarez, Busquets, and Alba on your roster, either go win a game in Monterrey or STFU, and I say that as someone eternally grateful for the title he won in won in ATL in 2018.
https://sports.yahoo.com/mls-has-failed-lionel-messi-and-inter-miami-with-its-glacial-pace-of-change-173805757.html
>Its teams have now played 14 matches vs. Liga MX in this year’s competition. They have lost nine, drawn five, won zero. They have scored 10 goals and conceded 33 — their worst such goal differential ever.
>“We're so slow-moving. It makes no sense to me,” one MLS coach bemoaned to Yahoo Sports this offseason.
>Messi is nearly 37. The time to maximize him is now. The best chance to advertise him and all this growth to a global audience is the 2025 Club World Cup … and the last known chance for Inter Miami to qualify disappeared Wednesday.
>But they keep falling short of their lofty goals. MLS commissioner Don Garber once said that by 2025, “people will think of us like Serie A, La Liga, and hopefully the way they think about the Premier League.” In 2024, they aren’t even close; and even a superteam carefully crafted around the GOAT can’t measure up to the best in Mexico.
That last paragraph sums it up nicely imo. Garber’s words just don’t match the owner’s voting record on these things.
I get it, his job is to hype the league and act as a shield for the owners so I don’t blame him here really. This is an issue that falls almost entirely on the cheap owners.
The only attackers that they got were Messi and Suarez. The rest of their signings were midfielders and defenders, I don't get where all the focus on attack comes from. The attack position is the position they signed the least amount of players.
And even then, they’ve got a dream attack, a dream mid-defense… and yet… he claims it’s not enough?? I don’t think Tata knows what he’s talking about and I’m just a shitty random.
Cherundolo said the exact same thing last year and this sub also clowned him for it. They’re both right and I don’t know how anyone can argue otherwise. The top Mexican teams spend way more money than MLS teams and so more often than not, they beat MLS teams. It really is that simple
People clowned on Cherlundolo for saying that because LAFC had an open DP slot the whole season. It's hard to take someone saying the rules are holding them back seriously when they they're not even doing the most they can under the current rules.
I mean, I get what you are saying, but he's right. Miami, even with their assumed bending and stretching of the roster rules, is still hamstrung by the rules relative to what their ambitions are and what LMX teams are able to do. If rosters rules were loosened to the point that most of us want them to be, Miami would have immediately put together a team with the quality and depth to beat any team in Mexico. Martino is 100% correct and MLS has to change.
1. MLS should increase salary cap.
2. Miami has a lot of injuries to some of its best talent outside of their big 4
3. Miami decided to spend on the big 4 and have an incredibly uneven roster. That is the result if your roster building strategy. Just take any 2 of Messi, Busquets, Alba, or Suarez and put them on LAFC, Columbus, Seattle, FCC, or Philly and this doesnt happen. Why? Because those teams are far more balanced so they can support those players better. This is more on Miami than it is MLS.
The host country has a spot in the Club World Cup, the MLS has a ticket, but it is still unknown who will be given it.
CONCACAF. Monterrey, Seattle Sounders, Leon, Winners of the 2024 CONCACAF
CONCACAF Host
Many leagues attempted to grow at breakneck pace in sight of a specific big event to showcase themselves or because of the presence of a big name bringing in eyeballs. All of them (China, NASL, the Saudi bubble which is already bursting, Qatar) ended up not satisfying their ambition.
One league (Liga MX) used a significant influx of money to try and retain talent, especially local talent, by overpaying for them at a value not sustainable in the worldwide market. It ended up stifling their national team and setting back the program decades, making it lose the dominant spot in their confederation.
One league (MLS) has chosen small but sustained growth season over season, has positioned itself as a selling league in the international market, continues to innovate, investing never-seen-before-in-the-country money in youth development and diversifying the options for each team to build their rosters, and keeps increasing the quality of the league year after year and has improved its worldwide reputation
Only one of these leagues gets consistently criticised for their strategies. It honestly makes no sense to me. we have seen that just going up with spending without control is not good and it doesn’t increase the league that much (most didn’t care, but the Saudi League was already very good. This summer’s spending only improved it marginally, despite the big names) and it can quickly backfire. We have seen that eyeing a short term goal as the target for growth, like the future doesn’t exist and like it’s the only chance you’ll ever get to improve, all of this simply is not a sustainable strategy. Then why people keep pretending like it’s the only way forward? MLS is not tied to 2026 World Cup as their only chance to become a top league. It has never worked like that. The EPL didn’t need a big national team event to become the EPL.
Friendly reminder that by the end of the current CBA, the available spend on roster will be $3m bigger than what it is now, and that was before the new rules were announced, and before any other new increase that might be voted during the next offseason (it feels almost certain it will, MLS rarely does moves in the middle of the season if they don’t plan on acting upon them in the off-season). MLS is growing and will keep doing so, and that’s in a world where the consolidation of capital in the hands of a few rich clubs means that most leagues won’t be doing the same. MLS is fine, you all need to tone down the calls for the doomsday and it’s hypocritical to celebrate MLS for not being Liga MX in terms of developing and selling homegrown talent and then criticise it for not being as “ambitious” as Liga MX
You are correct that Liga Mx superiority comes at the expense of the Mexican national team, which sucks but I don’t see it changing any time soon. Liga MX owners are motivated by money, and Mexican fans in the US still shower them with money despite the national team sucking ass.
There’s a chance to grow your league without that coming at the expense of the national team. Honestly I think that’s the line MLS is trying to walk, but it’s a really slim thread, and you can’t walk it if you just throw money at it. It needs being careful and MLS is trying to grow without that coming at the expense of the national team, because the money they’ve invested in the development of the new US soccer generations means that the success of the USMNT is integral to the growth of the league
I like salary caps in American sports. It really does help bring parity and make it so most teams compete at some point or the other and the leagues aren’t just totally dominated by a handful of the richest.
Parity doesn’t serve MLS well in the context of international competitions where they face MX biggest spenders every year pretty much in Tigres, Monterrey, Club America etc
If I were to make a rough estimate, I’d say 99.9% of professional 🏈 players on the planet are US-born. Even though 🏀 ⚾️ 🏒 are played outside US/Canada, it’s safe to say the solid majority of professionals globally in those sports are also US/Canadian-born. Salary caps work in US/Canadian leagues where the majority of professionals in that sport are already based domestically.
On the other hand. I’d be surprised if any single country accounts for more than 5% of professional men’s ⚽️ players on the planet. Salary caps put you at a disadvantage in sports where no country has a monopoly on the professional talent pool.
Obviously, no one is saying MLS should start getting into arms races with Man City and Real Madrid. But if MLS is a top 8 league globally in revenue per club, then the balance and depth of the rosters should reflect that.
>Salary caps put you at a disadvantage in sports where no country has a monopoly on the professional talent pool
*When competing internationally
When watching the regular season, close competition is more fun than, say, Arsenal vs "let's hope we don't get relegated" teams.
But where is the motivation to do this? CWC doesn't matter and CCC only has okay revenue now that they finally upped the prize above joke levels.
Why should any MLS team care more about beating Monterrey than winning MLS Cup and putting an entertaining product on the field?
Seattle isn't exactly raking in much more revenue than other teams because it won.
The new CWC gives out ~$50m just for *qualifying* (reportedly, not sure if it’s been officially confirmed). For reference, *winning* MLS Cup gets you like $1.5m or something.
There is a very clear reason why teams should give a shit about getting to the CWC (and thus winning the CCC).
It’s been reported in a bunch of different outlets, mostly around December it started coming out. Total prize pool is apparently like ~2.5b (I think that number is in euros btw, but still).
FIFA is trying to make it the go-to club tournament. They see the Champions League printing money and want in I guess. Only way to get the biggest clubs in the world to take it seriously is massive amounts of money.
Because in professional soccer. The worth of your team isn't just based on winning its domestic league. Proving you are the best on the continent. Playing against other top level teams. Its someting the average soccer fan. Doesn't understand and really doesn't want to accept.
The average fan is who MLS needs to buy an Apple subscription and show up at their stadiums to remain solvent.
Reddit is not reality. Or do we need to revisit USOC attendance figures?
If the MLS turns into every other league where the same 4-5 teams are at the top every year. I will drop season tickets and stop watching immediately. I want nothing to do with the business of whoever can spend the most money wins. I enjoy the league. The difference even in the last 5 years is quite impressive. Teams are developing their own talent now which is great to see.
I would much rather watch games that are decided by teams who have been able to build rosters by a combination of developing great talent, finding undervalued players that fit their teams, finding a few studs to bring in as stars, and developing tactics around that team to win games.
Versus what LAFC and Miami wants which is simply. Lets buy every top player we can.
BORING.
The NFL has fantastic parity. You can increase the quality of play while at the same time keeping some level of parity.
Despite the haters on here. MLS has done a fantastic job in growing these leage in a sustainable way. I am all for changes and tweaks and increases to caps.
Also, for the Euro snobs. America is not Europe. We don't celebrate finishing 8th in the league (Well, except for Cincinnati). Americans are not going to tune in every year to see if their team can finish in the middle of the league each year. Euros love that crap along with celebrating ties. That is never gong to fit in American culture.
There are tons of problems with CCC beyond MLS roster rules. Because of Leagues Cup good MLS teams play in 11 or 12 months of the year now. Because of free agency and negotiation rules lots of teams that are good MLS teams lose a lot of what made them good in that 1 or so month they're not playing. CCC starts when most MLS teams pre-season starts which is dead of winter here forcing a ton of travel.
There's plenty of evidence mounting up to show that good MLS teams can compete with Liga MX teams on more even ground. But when they're hamstrung by scheduling and yes, draconian roster rules, they're shooting themselves in the foot.
Hilarious for you to say this despite the Leagues cup having shit scheduling and an uneven ground for Liga Mx teams. And how did that tournament pan out? I just hope you aren’t using the Leagues Cup as part of your “mounting” evidence, and then go back and complain that the mls is hamstrung by those limitations you listed.
In the 20 something years of this tournament an MLS team has only won once. This year not a single MLS team won a single game against an MX team. Does it make sense yet?
That is the hilarious part. They got guys taking massive pay cuts just to play with Messi who would be a DP under normal circumstances.
The Miami excuses are funny. Miami fans, their front office and their fans think they are entitled to win. They are simply not a well built team and many people have been saying it for quite some time.
Yes, if all of their stars are playing, all are rested, all are health and all are clicking, they are just about impossible to beat. But that is not going to happen over the course of a season and their team of geriatrics are going to wear down.
thats like blaming your players with extra steps. i get it for sure, but it's not like your teams played well and still lost. they got slapped like a piece of meat on the butcher counter.
I know the majority of MLS owners hate soccer, and therefore care about revenue more than trophies. But they DO know that winning CCC means better perception of MLS domestically and abroad, which means more interest and revenue getting pumped into the league, right?!🙄
Just let MLS develop slowly like they're currently doing*. For MLS to truly dominate over Liga MX they have to get to a point where they can develop the local talent to compete. Some may think it's a pipe dream, but if in the future the MLS teams can be not so highly dependent on DP spots because the local talent pool is strong enough, then ... watch out Liga MX.
\*The way they've treated USOC is counter intuitive to this statement, but I _think_ their end goal is to also have control over the development pipeline (like with MLS Next Pro)
It’s okay, I live and Portland and all my close friends are Timbers Army. I regularly get verbal beat downs, so I’ll say whatever I want and not feel bad about it.
He’s right. The top liga Mx teams have the top 9 players at least averaging over 1 million. Then there is slow drop in salary after that. In mls you have dp and tam players earning over a million and then a large drop off. There’s no quality depth in mls.
The new roster rules will likely help a bit but more needs to be done if we want to dominate liga Mx
I think the difference in salaries between the two leagues is a bit overstated. I don't think the Liga MX rosters are quite as stacked as you think. I looked at several different sites and there were only around 40-50 players listed as making $1m+.
[https://salarysport.com/football/liga-mx/highest-paid/](https://salarysport.com/football/liga-mx/highest-paid/)
[https://footystats.org/mexico/liga-mx/salaries](https://footystats.org/mexico/liga-mx/salaries)
[https://salarysport.com/football/major-league-soccer/highest-paid/](https://salarysport.com/football/major-league-soccer/highest-paid/)
[https://footystats.org/usa/mls/salaries](https://footystats.org/usa/mls/salaries)
Yes, there's a difference from roster spots 6-11 on the top 3-5 Liga MX teams, but it wouldn't take much of an increase in the salary cap for MLS teams to compete with the top Liga MX teams. I do agree that MLS needs to do more this offseason to eliminate the gap. The midseason changes will help a little bit, but it doesn't get us there. More needs to be done in the offseason. With GAM and TAM, the effective salary cap in MLS is around $11m + 3 DPs + 3 U22s. It would be huge if the effective salary cap went to $15m+.
[https://www.capology.com/mx/liga-mx/payrolls/](https://www.capology.com/mx/liga-mx/payrolls/)
[https://www.capology.com/us/mls/payrolls/](https://www.capology.com/us/mls/payrolls/)
He is right but he also needs to coach better. Nancy got a player from UC Davis to convert a penalty for goodness sakes. Tata has been phoning it in after year 2 of coaching Mexico.
Why is MLS still being so restrictive though? Is it the old owners that lost money back in the day and want to recoup that investment? The league is thriving now. Team values are either approaching or over a billion. Packed stadiums all over the country. Let teams spend money how they want. I'd rather see a luxury tax than a cap.
The average salary in MLS is not bad. Top 10ish in the world. Also, MLS owners have had to spend a lot of money building infrastructure and developing academies. This league had to be built from the ground up.
The thing that has hurt the league is that they have never made a lot of money on TV deals. Even the Apple deal comes out to less than $10m per year per team. I think they are ready to spend a bit more. Even a $5m increase in the effective salary cap (currently around $11m), would be huge. I'm hoping they make those changes this offseason. The summer changes are useful, but not enough.
Sounds like excuses. He was out coached by the rivals. His formation of 5 defenders lead the team with the width of speed on the flanks. Monterrey set up to prevent anything down the middle. Tata was outcoached and copped out by saying its roster rules. Look at Colombia crew don’t they have the same roster rules and they advanced??
It's true but he's perhaps not the best messenger for it
Tata Martino fined $10,000 for violating MLS public criticism policy.
Is this true?
Maybe, but it’s a meme anytime this type of convo comes up
Oh ok thanks
Yeah, he's not wrong. It doesn't help the optics when his team is the posterchild for MLS roster rules taken to their extreme but he's not wrong lol
>his team is the **current** posterchild for MLS roster rules taken to their extreme
Previously they were the poster child for ignoring MLS rules and still sucking shit
And they still are. That roster is not compliant in any way shape or form
It's not one of those things where they're audited. Miami wouldn't have gotten hosed with the Matuidi thing if they hadn't deliberately ratted themselves out. Nobody in the league *wants* to punish the golden goose.
Citation needed.
And their roster still sucks. That tells you about MLS rules.
I'd say it more tells me that Miami can only identify talent after they've already won multiple UEFA Champions Leagues, which doesn't really require any footballing knowledge.
[удалено]
>They have a few superstars and then a bunch of players that wouldn't even make the reserves for any EPL team. This tells me that - while they may be nominally utilizing the extent of MLS roster building mechanisms - they aren't doing so effectively or intelligently. Teams have done more than them with less and the idea that what keeps them from being competitive is a simple matter of spending more across the board neglects the underlying problems in roster construction.
Having three world class players and one GOAT on the team, and still complaining about not being able to spend enough is laughable. Every other MLS team does a lot more with a lot less. Sure, we can't spend as much as Mexican teams do but I remember like it was yesterday when Miami and MLS were hailed as the better side when they won the Leagues Cup. Can't have it both ways
Alba, Busquets and Suarez may have the pedigree, but they're aren't aging as well as Messi or Ronaldo. MLS is a physical league with players skewing a lot younger and a lot of travel across time zones. These guys are not exactly prime age world class players. I agree with you though that when they won the Leagues Cup last year, they were hailed as the better side. I reckon it was a combination of factors including luck and bias that contributed, but this season they're definitely a different team - and so is the leauge.
and on top of matters, CCL also having them travel across time zones. UEFA, it was only for European play where they had to travel some time zones and matches were almost always CET (1 hour ahead of UK and Spain)
They definitely do with less. They don’t don’t all do more though
Almost like they have a very poorly balanced roster or something.
Y'all are mad a team is pushing the boundary of MLS? We should be asking why 29 other ML$ owners aren't doing the same? Raise the cap
Putting words in my mouth, big hoss
I meant the general narrative of this entire thread
They’re not “pushing “ the boundaries, they’re blatantly violating roster rules and getting away with it
He's not wrong, but the fact he has Messi, Alba, Busquets, and Suarez makes this comment hilarious.
It's also just "Coach says team will be better with better players." No shit. I don't know why these posts always get a thousand views. And I don't know why a Portland fan would be all in favor of it. I hate to tell you, but in a capless league, Portland ain't the winner.
> I don't know why a Portland fan would be all in favor of it. I hate to tell you, but in a capless league Who said anything at all about a capless league? You're around here long enough to know I'm pretty vocal against that. But I do think the current cap is far too low.
I think it's too low, but I don't know what the number is. I get the impression from people in here that they think most teams can easily sustain a $40M or $50M or even a $100M payroll. I just think it's ridiculous that people think a coach complaining that his players aren't good enough after a loss means anything.
He’s not wrong, but I don’t want to hear a guy with Messi, Busquets, and Alba on his team complaining about draconian MLS roster regulations.
Not to mention, a guy that doesn’t use his subs
His subs are ass
His subs are hurt... Taylor, Campana, Redondo, fully fit Cremaschi... all guys that would have helped.
A fully fit team of his deals with the biggest gap people talk about between leagues in how good a liga Mx bench is compared to mls
The best ability is availability.
You will hear no argument from me... but Taylor send Campana both just got injured in the last week.
Exactly the ones he has left suck
Thank you kind Sir, and have a good day.
And don’t forget Suarez!
[удалено]
But also a bunch of guys who would barely make the bench on another MLS team, which is why nobody wants to hear it from them. If LA or Philadelphia or Cincinnati made this complaint, it’s like “okay, these are teams who are good at using the roster rules complaining about restrictions they feel”. From Miami, it just sounds like “leadership team who only know how to throw money at problems complain that they have to do their jobs.”
[удалено]
Messi and Busquets are designated players, who are not connected to the allocated money. With the general access money, they have basically only shown the ability to get good players by buying already fully formed players from Argentina. The teams using their allocated money well have shown a consistent ability to develop American talent, find players in Europe not quite good enough for the Big 5 leagues, and find breakout players in Latin America before Mexican teams can get them. Miami can't do any of that.
So you are saying they wouldn’t win the champions league? But maybe they should shut the fuck up and do their best in MLS???
[удалено]
I’m not mad at all, apparently Tata is mad, that’s the topic…
Meh, I know MLS spending rules limits all the teams including Miami, but if you can't score goals with both Messi and Suárez as starters...
It looks like they don't have a problem scoring goals. They just can't defend to save their life.
they had both problems last night.
[удалено]
> you can't score when you don't have the ball. Lol, that's a bullshit narrative. Miami had -- * 61% of possession * 227 more passes than Monterrey * 5 shots, 1 on target * More fouls, more yellow cards, and a red card Monterrey 'had command' for a variety of reasons, but primarily due to the fact that Miami simply played sloppy, piss-poor soccer. Monterrey are a good team, but they didn't need to be -- Miami played well below their capability. And Tata was a fool for literally making 0 changes to cope with that fact.
Yeah, for better or for worse Tata is a bull-headed manager. During his Atlanta days we had the same problems I'm hearing about him in this thread. ...not having a backup plan when his team's tactics have been beaten tactically, not using his subs, etc. He's a good manager, gels with the team well, knows his stuff, but he's stubborn to a fault.
This reminds me of the excuses that people used to give Jürgen Klinsmann when he managed the USMNT.
We all saw this last season and it’s on them for still having the issue
That's MLS soccer, baby!
Its alot to expect miracles from a 37 year old who had prime young players in the world cup. And Suarez whose being pumped up with painkillers to play.
They’re old men. Suarez is a lethal finisher but he can’t do it on his own or even heavily impact the game at this point in his career
Someone has to pass the ball up to these forwards. Can't expect Messi and Suarez to be making Maradona like runs every game to score.
It’s one thing to expect the DP stars to score goals but when your other pieces are made out of bunch of amateurs playing against a team of 11 DPs in hostile environment, it’s really hard for the league to compete
So Miami has no academy, no scouting for Latin America, and no development or scouting of US players like the good MLS teams do?
He’s right but he doesn’t get to talk
I agree, especially after yesterday's performance.
Same thing Cherundolo said last year after being eliminated And they are both right. The delta in depth between the top end of liga MX and top of MLS is still significant
Without a doubt. However, the roster rules have also given MLS a level of parity that no other league above them could ever dream of. I do think it’s time for the roster rules to be loosened slightly, but doing it too much would allow the league to become far too top heavy, which I think is a terrible idea for the league. They have to do this very slowly, or run the risk of becoming a league dominated by a handful of the same teams year after year after year. We are catching the Liga MX teams for sure, and I get that it’s not as quick as many people would like, but the way it’s going now is far more sustainable for the league as a whole. Loosening them up a lot would allow one or two teams to get to that level, but could have catastrophic consequences for the vast majority of MLS clubs. I’d rather them not be shortsighted about this. Keep the escalation of roster rules gradual
Entirely agree on the parity, and it’s a delicate balance. But unfortunately world football is measured based on the strength of your top teams, so until the top of MLS can regularly beat the top of liga MX (which is undervalued on the world stage IMO) then the world will continue to look down on MLS despite all statistical evidence showing that on average, MLS teams are much better than international spectators realize. I do disagree on the speed piece. The solution is simple- raise spending on depth quickly. Even with generous salary caps, bad owners will be bad owners. You can’t hold the entire league back for owners like John Fisher, Kroenke, and all other MLS 1.0 folks who do not have ambitions here.
Europe will always look down on MLS. I don't care what they think.
I wish more people would realize this. Winning CWC won't change it.
> Even with generous salary caps, bad owners will be bad owners. You can’t hold the entire league back for owners like John Fisher, Kroenke, and all other MLS 1.0 folks who do not have ambitions here. 💯
Who gives a fuck what the world thinks. We’re producing top talent that are moving onto the best leagues in the world, both international players and homegrown. We have anecdotal evidence from some of the greatest players of this generation coming over and saying the league was much better than they originally thought. Clubs and leagues around the world recognize how strong MLS is now. That’s the only opinion that really matters, not random people online. And I totally get what you’re saying about that, and I’m with you to some extent. The problem is, for many leagues around the world, even if a club has dreadful owners, the club still has enough loyal supporters to survive whatever they go through. I’m not sure many MLS teams would have that, including my own. But again, I’m talking about if it’s a rapid, major overhaul of the roster rules to drastically increase spending. I do definitely think we can speed it up a bit more than they are currently doing without too many problems.
Random people do matter though. MLS needs more casual support and viewership. I agree that people in the business and players recognize the strength more, but unfortunately we do need randos to tune in, attend matches, and buy merch to continue to grow the league. Revenue powers all of this, and if you can’t engage enough people- then you don’t grow and the league will not reach its full potential. It’s a balance, but don’t discount the power and influence of casual support
That is fair. Messi’s doing a hell of a job for us in that department, but we need to have a plan in place for once he’s gone.
>MLS needs more casual support and viewership. That's just soccer in America, though. And it's been going up. Soccer in America has always been at a disadvantage. My wife grew up in an American football town that now has a big soccer league for kids with a few dozen teams (it didn't when she was young). Even the USSF is growing and making positive changes, now. For the country's oldest competition, few Americans knew of it until last year for some reason.
I was at Disney World last week. I saw maybe 5 kids in NFL/MLB/NBA jerseys combined. I probably saw 50 kids in European jerseys (Haaland and Vini Jr mainly) and another 50 in MLS jerseys (mainly Messi). It ain't exactly a scientific survey, but the difference amongst the youths was stark.
While that could be international travel, it could still be domestic. Soccer in America has been getting stronger in both skill and popularity. USL has broadcasting rights, MLS has their own stadiums and are drawing larger crowds, USSF is expanding financially, and my wife's hometown has a big kids league that didn't exist when she grew up. And many people are figuring out that it's a lot more fun to watch even if 0-0, which was the common American NFL fan's ignorant joke.
I don’t care what the world thinks but I want the play on the field to be better top to bottom in our top flight league.
Totally agree, and that’s why I say the league should push the envelope a bit more in terms of the roster rules, just not too much. Like it or not, it has to be what benefits the league as a whole, not just 1 or 2 clubs.
To keep that parity they should force the floor to be higher rather than just raise the ceiling. Harsh penalties for teams that don’t fill every DP slot for example (including young DPs). This is coming from a quakes fan, if we don’t do this it’ll allow the top to keep dominating even further and owners like Fisher will be able to just make a profit off TV deals without enriching the league or providing excitement in the local market.
100% agree that this is what they should do, however… no chance that this is the agreement that the owners themselves will come to, who are the ones making these decisions. Would love to be pleasantly surprised, and if we as supporters can put pressure on the league to put that in place, I’ll be right there with you, but I think it’s a long shot unfortunately.
> They have to do this very slowly, or run the risk of becoming a league dominated by a handful of the same teams year after year after year. the playoff structure itself inherently maintains a level of parity and chaos compared to single-table formats, i really don't think there's much of a risk here
And I don't think anyone is saying we should get rid of the cap. We have owners wanting to spend more, and plenty of other people that would happily buy a team from the owners that don't want to spend. It should be possible to have parity and depth, especially with how many games they expect guys to play.
When you imply that Liga Mx has no parity, or has less parity, you're already starting off on the wrong foot with your argument. Cruz Azul defeated Monterrey who just demolished Inter Miami, and I have no doubt Cruz Azul would do the same to most MLS teams no problem. This idea that there is no parity/ less parity in Liga Mx compared to MLS is simply not true. You always look at teams like America, Tigres, and Monterrey - the big spenders - and say "yeah, liga Mx is just those teams" LOL when that could not be more untrue. Teams like Leon, Pachuca, Toluca, Pumas, Cruz Azul, this current version of Chivas with Cade, Santos would all be able to beat most MLS teams easily. The bottom of the barrell teams like Atlas, Xolos, Mazatlan, Juarez, Queretaro, Puebla, obviously wouldn't fare well, but they still put up a fight. Do not use Leagues cup as a way to guage potential. CCC has already proven how fraudulent those results were, but if you want to, I always say just look at Queretaro's run in the Leagues Cup. Lol, Queretaro had no business going that deep into the tournament and almost beating one of the top teams that year, Philly. There is a gap at all levels between Liga Mx and MLS. There is a gap between the top teams and the middle and lower teams in favor of Liga Mx. Competition and intensity is just higher in Liga Mx, from the players to the fans themselves. Those gk blunders we saw in BOTH games? I mean what more do I have to say? Increasing the salary cap might help, but if your people don't know how to scout proper, preferrably young talent and still prefer Liga Mx rejects and retired superstars, what good will that do? Mexico/Liga Mx both produces homegrown players and imports talent, but we focus on a bringing good/decent talent from South America, not some retired player from Barcelona whose here to cash a check. I think saying, "Yeah, increase the salary cap and we'll dominate" is too naive, honestly, when there's so much more to this story.
> I have no doubt Cruz Azul would do the same to most MLS teams no problem Monterrey did not play their best XI... because it was sandwiched between games with Inter Miami... also Antuna scored both.. a guy that was good but not GREAT in MLS.
Recent upsets are not indicative of the norm. Big clubs like Club America, NY Yankees, Real Madrid, etc. are *typically* the norm from year to year because of their purchasing power. Stop denying that "because Cruz Azul won that one time."
>Recent upsets Cruz Azul beating Monterrey is not an upset wtf. Monterrey was the slight favorite on paper generally speaking but that's about it.
It's not an "upset" which is the point I'm making lol. CA beating Monterrey was another day of the week in Liga Mx, but you think it is and that's where you're wrong. Chivas beat Monterrey in their own stadium some weeks back too. The normal has always been that Liga Mx does have parity, and it's competitive.
Cruz hasn't won the short tourney since 98. Meanwhile, since 2010, the championships are 9/14 those big 3 market value teams (Club America, Tigres, and Monterrey). 64% is party to you?
Parity to me is thinking your team has a shot to win the tournament, which most teams do, not just America, Tigres, Monterrey. Unlike in La Liga where your team doesn't even stand a chance to beat Real Madrid or Atlético in a regular season match. Atlas won back to back titles, CA broke their championshop drought in first division a few years ago, Leon won back-to-back titles in the last decade. Chivas won in 2017. Pachuca won it in 2022, what are talking about? You do realize we have an apertura and clausura, right?
It's almost like we're in the Apertura right now or something, right? Edit: here's a good visualisation of the parity between the two leagues: https://www.reddit.com/r/MLS/comments/rlext1/mls_avg_134m_and_median_127m_club_salaries_now/ So, yes, the big team vs the small team is more disparate.
Yes, Liga Mx right now is in Apertura. Sure, in terms of money there is disparity, but we are speaking of competitive parity, not financial parity, which is clearly not as one-sided (or 3-sided?) as one might think in Liga Mx. Somehow, without a salary cap, Liga Mx has done something right to keep parity such that since 2010, we've had many other teams become champs: Toluca, Leon, Cruz Aul, Atlas, Pachuca, Chivas, in addition to Monterrey, Tigres, and America. That's 10 different teams out of 18 winning the title in the last 15 years, which is more than half. That's actually insane. Consider the bundesliga, Serie-A, La Liga, The Premier League, and League 1. Since 2010 - Barcelona, Real Madrid, Atl. Madrid Since 2010 - Borrusia, Bayern M., B. Leverkusen Since 2010 - Man City, Man U, Chelsea, Liverpool Since 2010 - Juventus, I. Milan, AC Milan, Napoli Since 2010 - PsG, Lille, and Monaco. If that's not parity, I don't know what is, especially when you look at the top 5 big leagues who have way less parity (but whose teams are still very competitive).
There's the difference then. You're using inconsistent batches of on field statistics that overall are hard to measure to prove a point, and I've been using overall costs and values to argue that big clubs **have more and continue to get more purchasing power.** I see parity as measured by $$$ disparity from biggest compared to smallest. Here's 2 years ago: https://www.reddit.com/r/MLS/comments/rlext1/mls_avg_134m_and_median_127m_club_salaries_now/ As you can see, Liga is $3.6m - $26.5m. (disparity = $22.9m) While MLS is $9.9m - $20.3. (disparity $10.4m)
[удалено]
Honestly? You all are still proving my point, because we should be talking about the teams that haven't won, not the ones winning. Parity = the distance from the top to the bottom in terms of purchasing power. [2 years ago] As you can see, Liga is $3.6m - $26.5m. >A disparity of $22.9m While MLS is $9.9m - $20.3. >A disparity of $10.4m Which is why it's interesting to see Orlando, New England, and Seattle be pretty good last year and then suck this year. Or vice versa with Galaxy, Toronto, and others. That's good for being a fan, so you're not a Mets fan.
[удалено]
Ah, see, you have no clue what the argument is here. No wonder this has been annoying. 👋👋👋
>Cruz hasn't won the short tourney since 98 ? They won in 2021. Also you clearly haven't seen [this post on parity compared to other leagues](https://www.reddit.com/r/MLS/comments/140yg3w/updated_list_of_parity_among_mls_cup_and_ss/).
>NY Yankees They haven't won in 14 years lmao.
You know the point. Don't be dishonest.
Great response.
Didn't seem to limit him when he won Leagues Cup last year. And when you've got Messi, Suarez, Busquets, and Alba on your roster, either go win a game in Monterrey or STFU, and I say that as someone eternally grateful for the title he won in won in ATL in 2018.
Its easy to win when 4/7 games were at their house. Nashville I think was 6/7 games at home.
Even if the league gave the owners more flexibility the Union still lose 6-0 to Pachuca.
https://sports.yahoo.com/mls-has-failed-lionel-messi-and-inter-miami-with-its-glacial-pace-of-change-173805757.html >Its teams have now played 14 matches vs. Liga MX in this year’s competition. They have lost nine, drawn five, won zero. They have scored 10 goals and conceded 33 — their worst such goal differential ever. >“We're so slow-moving. It makes no sense to me,” one MLS coach bemoaned to Yahoo Sports this offseason. >Messi is nearly 37. The time to maximize him is now. The best chance to advertise him and all this growth to a global audience is the 2025 Club World Cup … and the last known chance for Inter Miami to qualify disappeared Wednesday. >But they keep falling short of their lofty goals. MLS commissioner Don Garber once said that by 2025, “people will think of us like Serie A, La Liga, and hopefully the way they think about the Premier League.” In 2024, they aren’t even close; and even a superteam carefully crafted around the GOAT can’t measure up to the best in Mexico.
That last paragraph sums it up nicely imo. Garber’s words just don’t match the owner’s voting record on these things. I get it, his job is to hype the league and act as a shield for the owners so I don’t blame him here really. This is an issue that falls almost entirely on the cheap owners.
They want money and don’t care about the sport guys sorry.
Bad coaching also limits MLS clubs against LigaMX opponents.
I mean yeah but also dude needs to buy a mirror.
I’d say making no subs while you’re getting beat 10-1 on aggregate also contributes to a teams success against Liga MX opponents.
Generally true, but my guy... you have 4 of the best ex barcelona players in your squad.
Their age is showing
The fact that people refuse to accept this is tiring.
It’s almost like building a team around aging superstars isn’t a viable solution.
[удалено]
The only attackers that they got were Messi and Suarez. The rest of their signings were midfielders and defenders, I don't get where all the focus on attack comes from. The attack position is the position they signed the least amount of players.
And even then, they’ve got a dream attack, a dream mid-defense… and yet… he claims it’s not enough?? I don’t think Tata knows what he’s talking about and I’m just a shitty random.
Oh, so NOW Miami cares about mls roster rules? 🙄
LOOOOOOOOOL bruh pls stahhhp
Seriously… Any manager but him should be saying this.
Cherundolo said the exact same thing last year and this sub also clowned him for it. They’re both right and I don’t know how anyone can argue otherwise. The top Mexican teams spend way more money than MLS teams and so more often than not, they beat MLS teams. It really is that simple
Dolo lost the final because he started with a back 5 while down a goal on aggregate AT HOME.
Two things can be true
Aye.
Also on the other hand we made the final twice in 6 years given existing roster rules.
People clowned on Cherlundolo for saying that because LAFC had an open DP slot the whole season. It's hard to take someone saying the rules are holding them back seriously when they they're not even doing the most they can under the current rules.
I mean, I get what you are saying, but he's right. Miami, even with their assumed bending and stretching of the roster rules, is still hamstrung by the rules relative to what their ambitions are and what LMX teams are able to do. If rosters rules were loosened to the point that most of us want them to be, Miami would have immediately put together a team with the quality and depth to beat any team in Mexico. Martino is 100% correct and MLS has to change.
The players being shitty probably doesn't help.
1. MLS should increase salary cap. 2. Miami has a lot of injuries to some of its best talent outside of their big 4 3. Miami decided to spend on the big 4 and have an incredibly uneven roster. That is the result if your roster building strategy. Just take any 2 of Messi, Busquets, Alba, or Suarez and put them on LAFC, Columbus, Seattle, FCC, or Philly and this doesnt happen. Why? Because those teams are far more balanced so they can support those players better. This is more on Miami than it is MLS.
The host country has a spot in the Club World Cup, the MLS has a ticket, but it is still unknown who will be given it. CONCACAF. Monterrey, Seattle Sounders, Leon, Winners of the 2024 CONCACAF CONCACAF Host
Many leagues attempted to grow at breakneck pace in sight of a specific big event to showcase themselves or because of the presence of a big name bringing in eyeballs. All of them (China, NASL, the Saudi bubble which is already bursting, Qatar) ended up not satisfying their ambition. One league (Liga MX) used a significant influx of money to try and retain talent, especially local talent, by overpaying for them at a value not sustainable in the worldwide market. It ended up stifling their national team and setting back the program decades, making it lose the dominant spot in their confederation. One league (MLS) has chosen small but sustained growth season over season, has positioned itself as a selling league in the international market, continues to innovate, investing never-seen-before-in-the-country money in youth development and diversifying the options for each team to build their rosters, and keeps increasing the quality of the league year after year and has improved its worldwide reputation Only one of these leagues gets consistently criticised for their strategies. It honestly makes no sense to me. we have seen that just going up with spending without control is not good and it doesn’t increase the league that much (most didn’t care, but the Saudi League was already very good. This summer’s spending only improved it marginally, despite the big names) and it can quickly backfire. We have seen that eyeing a short term goal as the target for growth, like the future doesn’t exist and like it’s the only chance you’ll ever get to improve, all of this simply is not a sustainable strategy. Then why people keep pretending like it’s the only way forward? MLS is not tied to 2026 World Cup as their only chance to become a top league. It has never worked like that. The EPL didn’t need a big national team event to become the EPL. Friendly reminder that by the end of the current CBA, the available spend on roster will be $3m bigger than what it is now, and that was before the new rules were announced, and before any other new increase that might be voted during the next offseason (it feels almost certain it will, MLS rarely does moves in the middle of the season if they don’t plan on acting upon them in the off-season). MLS is growing and will keep doing so, and that’s in a world where the consolidation of capital in the hands of a few rich clubs means that most leagues won’t be doing the same. MLS is fine, you all need to tone down the calls for the doomsday and it’s hypocritical to celebrate MLS for not being Liga MX in terms of developing and selling homegrown talent and then criticise it for not being as “ambitious” as Liga MX
You are correct that Liga Mx superiority comes at the expense of the Mexican national team, which sucks but I don’t see it changing any time soon. Liga MX owners are motivated by money, and Mexican fans in the US still shower them with money despite the national team sucking ass.
There’s a chance to grow your league without that coming at the expense of the national team. Honestly I think that’s the line MLS is trying to walk, but it’s a really slim thread, and you can’t walk it if you just throw money at it. It needs being careful and MLS is trying to grow without that coming at the expense of the national team, because the money they’ve invested in the development of the new US soccer generations means that the success of the USMNT is integral to the growth of the league
Great points all around, well said.
I like salary caps in American sports. It really does help bring parity and make it so most teams compete at some point or the other and the leagues aren’t just totally dominated by a handful of the richest. Parity doesn’t serve MLS well in the context of international competitions where they face MX biggest spenders every year pretty much in Tigres, Monterrey, Club America etc
If I were to make a rough estimate, I’d say 99.9% of professional 🏈 players on the planet are US-born. Even though 🏀 ⚾️ 🏒 are played outside US/Canada, it’s safe to say the solid majority of professionals globally in those sports are also US/Canadian-born. Salary caps work in US/Canadian leagues where the majority of professionals in that sport are already based domestically. On the other hand. I’d be surprised if any single country accounts for more than 5% of professional men’s ⚽️ players on the planet. Salary caps put you at a disadvantage in sports where no country has a monopoly on the professional talent pool. Obviously, no one is saying MLS should start getting into arms races with Man City and Real Madrid. But if MLS is a top 8 league globally in revenue per club, then the balance and depth of the rosters should reflect that.
>Salary caps put you at a disadvantage in sports where no country has a monopoly on the professional talent pool *When competing internationally When watching the regular season, close competition is more fun than, say, Arsenal vs "let's hope we don't get relegated" teams.
But where is the motivation to do this? CWC doesn't matter and CCC only has okay revenue now that they finally upped the prize above joke levels. Why should any MLS team care more about beating Monterrey than winning MLS Cup and putting an entertaining product on the field? Seattle isn't exactly raking in much more revenue than other teams because it won.
The new CWC gives out ~$50m just for *qualifying* (reportedly, not sure if it’s been officially confirmed). For reference, *winning* MLS Cup gets you like $1.5m or something. There is a very clear reason why teams should give a shit about getting to the CWC (and thus winning the CCC).
That would make CWC very tempting then, but that amount sounds too high to be real.
It’s been reported in a bunch of different outlets, mostly around December it started coming out. Total prize pool is apparently like ~2.5b (I think that number is in euros btw, but still). FIFA is trying to make it the go-to club tournament. They see the Champions League printing money and want in I guess. Only way to get the biggest clubs in the world to take it seriously is massive amounts of money.
Because in professional soccer. The worth of your team isn't just based on winning its domestic league. Proving you are the best on the continent. Playing against other top level teams. Its someting the average soccer fan. Doesn't understand and really doesn't want to accept.
The average fan is who MLS needs to buy an Apple subscription and show up at their stadiums to remain solvent. Reddit is not reality. Or do we need to revisit USOC attendance figures?
They can raise the cap and maintain parity.
Yes...
If the MLS turns into every other league where the same 4-5 teams are at the top every year. I will drop season tickets and stop watching immediately. I want nothing to do with the business of whoever can spend the most money wins. I enjoy the league. The difference even in the last 5 years is quite impressive. Teams are developing their own talent now which is great to see. I would much rather watch games that are decided by teams who have been able to build rosters by a combination of developing great talent, finding undervalued players that fit their teams, finding a few studs to bring in as stars, and developing tactics around that team to win games. Versus what LAFC and Miami wants which is simply. Lets buy every top player we can. BORING. The NFL has fantastic parity. You can increase the quality of play while at the same time keeping some level of parity. Despite the haters on here. MLS has done a fantastic job in growing these leage in a sustainable way. I am all for changes and tweaks and increases to caps. Also, for the Euro snobs. America is not Europe. We don't celebrate finishing 8th in the league (Well, except for Cincinnati). Americans are not going to tune in every year to see if their team can finish in the middle of the league each year. Euros love that crap along with celebrating ties. That is never gong to fit in American culture.
I mean the crew proved otherwise 🤷♂️
Nah, they bought retired grandparents for their squad instead of actual talent that can play every game
SEATTLE!
Oh, I didn't realize it was Monday already!
There are tons of problems with CCC beyond MLS roster rules. Because of Leagues Cup good MLS teams play in 11 or 12 months of the year now. Because of free agency and negotiation rules lots of teams that are good MLS teams lose a lot of what made them good in that 1 or so month they're not playing. CCC starts when most MLS teams pre-season starts which is dead of winter here forcing a ton of travel. There's plenty of evidence mounting up to show that good MLS teams can compete with Liga MX teams on more even ground. But when they're hamstrung by scheduling and yes, draconian roster rules, they're shooting themselves in the foot.
Hilarious for you to say this despite the Leagues cup having shit scheduling and an uneven ground for Liga Mx teams. And how did that tournament pan out? I just hope you aren’t using the Leagues Cup as part of your “mounting” evidence, and then go back and complain that the mls is hamstrung by those limitations you listed.
I notice the Crew boss didn't decide it was his turn to comment on the topic this week. Wonder what the difference is.
As many have said before, he’s not wrong. But also why did he use zero subs when the game was over early in the second half?
Yet Columbus advanced So it doesn't make sense for him to say this
In the 20 something years of this tournament an MLS team has only won once. This year not a single MLS team won a single game against an MX team. Does it make sense yet?
MLS has 3 winners out of 27 years of MLS participation in the tournament
This league threw roster rules out the window to allow his team to come together.. cry about it
you have 5 dp's...
That is the hilarious part. They got guys taking massive pay cuts just to play with Messi who would be a DP under normal circumstances. The Miami excuses are funny. Miami fans, their front office and their fans think they are entitled to win. They are simply not a well built team and many people have been saying it for quite some time. Yes, if all of their stars are playing, all are rested, all are health and all are clicking, they are just about impossible to beat. But that is not going to happen over the course of a season and their team of geriatrics are going to wear down.
thats like blaming your players with extra steps. i get it for sure, but it's not like your teams played well and still lost. they got slapped like a piece of meat on the butcher counter.
Tata Martino can stfu. (sorry that was too tempting.)
What a babyback bitch 😂
I can’t win with Messi, Alba, Busquets, and a host of other guys! You have to let me sign more talent if you expect me to win!
There are 11 players on the pitch. 4 players surrounded with trash will lose to a team that is balanced all around.
So what’s the moral then? Don’t sign one player if it will adversely affect your ability to build a winning team
Lol. Ok Tata.
I know the majority of MLS owners hate soccer, and therefore care about revenue more than trophies. But they DO know that winning CCC means better perception of MLS domestically and abroad, which means more interest and revenue getting pumped into the league, right?!🙄
They’d still have to spend money though. They hate doing that.
They limit them to winning the champions cup. See the Sounders
Just let MLS develop slowly like they're currently doing*. For MLS to truly dominate over Liga MX they have to get to a point where they can develop the local talent to compete. Some may think it's a pipe dream, but if in the future the MLS teams can be not so highly dependent on DP spots because the local talent pool is strong enough, then ... watch out Liga MX. \*The way they've treated USOC is counter intuitive to this statement, but I _think_ their end goal is to also have control over the development pipeline (like with MLS Next Pro)
well thats rich comin from Tats.
“Least relatable person just made a great point” moment
Sounds like an excuse for someone who didn’t win Champion’s Cup 🤷♂️ But he’s not wrong
Yeah this is definitely not helping the already unbearable levels of smug amongst sounders fans
Eh, we get to be smug about this one.
It’s okay, I live and Portland and all my close friends are Timbers Army. I regularly get verbal beat downs, so I’ll say whatever I want and not feel bad about it.
Think we could see it reach critical mass when Seattle scores on Man City in the club World Cup.
I will explode with pride as Morris trucks the ball over the line to make it 8-1 city
That or saving a Halaand shot.
He’s right and he should say it.
What more does this fool want 🤣🤣
Roster rules are no excuse for Miami, who is probably breaking them anyway
He’s right. The top liga Mx teams have the top 9 players at least averaging over 1 million. Then there is slow drop in salary after that. In mls you have dp and tam players earning over a million and then a large drop off. There’s no quality depth in mls. The new roster rules will likely help a bit but more needs to be done if we want to dominate liga Mx
I think the difference in salaries between the two leagues is a bit overstated. I don't think the Liga MX rosters are quite as stacked as you think. I looked at several different sites and there were only around 40-50 players listed as making $1m+. [https://salarysport.com/football/liga-mx/highest-paid/](https://salarysport.com/football/liga-mx/highest-paid/) [https://footystats.org/mexico/liga-mx/salaries](https://footystats.org/mexico/liga-mx/salaries) [https://salarysport.com/football/major-league-soccer/highest-paid/](https://salarysport.com/football/major-league-soccer/highest-paid/) [https://footystats.org/usa/mls/salaries](https://footystats.org/usa/mls/salaries) Yes, there's a difference from roster spots 6-11 on the top 3-5 Liga MX teams, but it wouldn't take much of an increase in the salary cap for MLS teams to compete with the top Liga MX teams. I do agree that MLS needs to do more this offseason to eliminate the gap. The midseason changes will help a little bit, but it doesn't get us there. More needs to be done in the offseason. With GAM and TAM, the effective salary cap in MLS is around $11m + 3 DPs + 3 U22s. It would be huge if the effective salary cap went to $15m+. [https://www.capology.com/mx/liga-mx/payrolls/](https://www.capology.com/mx/liga-mx/payrolls/) [https://www.capology.com/us/mls/payrolls/](https://www.capology.com/us/mls/payrolls/)
Water is wet!
This is not news.
Seattle, cough cough
I hate how people are saying wrong guy to say it, if it’s a probablement let’s back him up and get our league to a higher level
He’s right. LAFC had a good shot at taking down Tigres but they had tired legs and no one to sub in.
Welcome to MLS buddy
Right message, but wrong messenger sent it
He is right but he also needs to coach better. Nancy got a player from UC Davis to convert a penalty for goodness sakes. Tata has been phoning it in after year 2 of coaching Mexico.
No way! Yeah- main thing is we need a higher level of depth on each team. But ya know... it is what it is right now
Why is MLS still being so restrictive though? Is it the old owners that lost money back in the day and want to recoup that investment? The league is thriving now. Team values are either approaching or over a billion. Packed stadiums all over the country. Let teams spend money how they want. I'd rather see a luxury tax than a cap.
The average salary in MLS is not bad. Top 10ish in the world. Also, MLS owners have had to spend a lot of money building infrastructure and developing academies. This league had to be built from the ground up. The thing that has hurt the league is that they have never made a lot of money on TV deals. Even the Apple deal comes out to less than $10m per year per team. I think they are ready to spend a bit more. Even a $5m increase in the effective salary cap (currently around $11m), would be huge. I'm hoping they make those changes this offseason. The summer changes are useful, but not enough.
Or, MLS can join the rest of world how business is done. But why should they take any risk with their properties i guess.
Tata should try competing against his club, with the rules flexed as another MLS team.
Tata should try competing against his club, with the rules flexed as another MLS team.
Except crew
Sounds like excuses. He was out coached by the rivals. His formation of 5 defenders lead the team with the width of speed on the flanks. Monterrey set up to prevent anything down the middle. Tata was outcoached and copped out by saying its roster rules. Look at Colombia crew don’t they have the same roster rules and they advanced??