On the 20th of March it was announced the MLS strikes had been called off and the season will start this Thursday in front of big crowds across the country. The rise in crowds and season ticket sales are a success story for MLS – but for every step forward MLS is being held back by their inability to recognise football is a global game – with Europe as the epicentre.
Football is not only present in most other countries around the world, but is their main sport and often integrated into their culture.
The subject of the strike was based around the player’s contracts. Already earning well below the average salary for a football player, MLS had the option to cancel their contracts at any time – even if the player was simply going through a bad run of form – and there would be no compensation. To cancel the contract of a football player in Europe could run a bill into the millions and is not a viable option. For over thirty years player power has increase dramatically and whilst it’s refreshing to see the MLS humbling these players – it’s not the reality of the situation.
This highlights another problem – it’s the MLS that owns the players, not the teams. This collective bargaining agreement follows the model of the other American sports, a model that no other footballing country employs. Isn’t it slightly ironic that the US can socialise their sports team but not their healthcare?
If the New York Red Bulls were to sell their top player then MLS receives the money and it will be shared amongst all the teams in the league. What incentive does this give to the teams? No incentive, no innovation and MLS will continue to lag behind even the smaller European leagues – hard to believe for a country, that when they put their mind to it, can do fantastic things. This socialist nature restricts progress of any one team and prevents the creation of super-teams – the chances therefore of MLS having a top 20 team is a long way off.
Another hindrance to their ability to export is their youth development. Collegic players only turn professional when they are around the age of 23. Whereas this may be an ideal age to bring players through in the NFL – at that age there are already world-class players in football. Fabregas, Messi, Ronaldo and Rooney have already been playing at the top level for five years by this point.
Footballers are starting earlier and earlier and this is something MLS has to address. American children pick a sport early in their lives, which unfortunately for MLS, tends to be traditional sports such as American Football, Baseball or Ice Hockey – this is where the American’s will have to break tradition.
MLS needs to do its own bit and has been criticised for not targeting the right demography – Miami Fusion was a casualty in 2002 of which some attributed by failing to reach out to Hispanic members of the community, instead just recruiting white, middle-class players.
The fact that I’m writing this in March with the season upon us suggests problems with the MLS calendar. The MLS season runs from March to November, cutting straight through the summer months – a sensible choice to prevent clashing with the NFL and the potential freezing temperatures parts of the US endure during the winter months. On the flip side – the potential exposure to high temperatures in a league not renown for technical ability poses the question are we seeing the best of MLS players?
The calendar also impacts the transfer window. Signing players in January is their best bet to get them ready for the next season, but January is not a time when clubs want to sell players, let alone their best ones. MLS currently recruits more internally than they do from abroad, but this is a fundamental problem that needs to be addressed if they want to get inline with the Europe.
There are some problems that MLS can’t solve overnight. ‘Soccer specific’ stadiums will take years to build but when available will ensure that the teams don’t find themselves playing in front of 30,000 people in a 80,000-seater stadium. The Red Bull arena in New York is a good start however.
With the limited budgets available in MLS it may also be wise to stick to their current conference system of East and West especially as there are more and more teams entering MLS every year. The rise in team numbers may also introduce the promotion/relegation, which in turns introduces a more competitive nature to the sport – after all there are no winners without losers. These are things that will evolve and whilst MLS is still in its infancy must put up with.
The last issue is the salary cap. Each team has an allotted amount to spend on wages per season, with the exception of two players of which they can spend more on – the Designated Player ruling (Beckham ruling). While this allows the league to attract top players and get into Sepp Blatter’s good books it also creates a split in the squad. For example David Beckham would be playing with players that earn around $50,000 a year – the gap is too large and has and will continue to create problems within teams.
It sometimes feels that MLS is fighting an unwinnable war in their bid to make football a mainstream sport in America. Tradition and culture is not on their side, but they must do all they can to ensure that MLS is not another NASL.
MLS is due to expand further from 16 to 18 teams in 2011 and it’s imperative that growth continues in this fashion for years to come. Efforts must be spent on the politics of the current system but more important there must be an alignment with Europe both in culture and timing.
The American’s have been guilty of re-inventing the wheel when it comes to football such as the 35 yard shootout and the countdown a la NBA – but now they have the best interest of the game in their heart when will they use their brain to make MLS reach it’s potential?
You are way behind in your section about soccer specific stadiums. Red Bull Arena is the 8th soccer specific stadium (and possibly the best, from this weekend’s accounts) in MLS. Not ‘a good start’ as you say. In several weeks, the Philadelphia Union will be the 10th team to make their home in a new soccer specific stadium. (The two L.A.-area teams share a stadium.) Of the other six teams, 5 have at least tentative plans to build a new facility. So this trend is closer to its completion than it is to its start.
Posted by Bud | 29 March, 2010, 22:01These are all fine points that fans here in America are aware of. Ask anyone here and they will tell you they want a strong home league to compete internationally for footballers along with a promotion/regelation system with the minor leagues. I think that with due time these things are possible to change in the MLS, but the league and its clubs must be financially viable first which happens by owning your own stadiums. This is imperative as this is what doomed the NASL – over-expansion and clubs not controlling their revenue streams.
If you’ve never been to America you must understand the NFL and MLB are so gigantic (they are covered year-long here in the States) any rush to change, for example, the MLS season to the fall instead of the spring could doom the league. I don’t think it’s feasible to change the season yet as there’s not enough established fans that would split from their gridiron loyalties on Sundays to the MLS quite yet. I do feel in order to advance the MLS this is one piece of the league that must change.
Don’t be fooled on the list of MLS negatives. Attendances are now averaging that of the NHL and NBA despite not having the pull on the media as those two leagues do, and MLS clubs are profitable. Our own stadiums are being built that resemble international fixtures more than just a place to play. American children are still playing football in droves and MLS clubs are building academies. The fact we’ve gotten this far is astonishing when we still have American generations that feel football is a communist sport!
Things are looking quite up indeed.
Posted by American Football | 30 March, 2010, 16:21Admittedly, there are many problems facing MLS as it looks to grow into a truly major soccer league. However, I disagree with the premise that the UEFA way is the only way. There is no argument that Europe is home to the strongest leagues and the vast majority of top calibre players do ply their trade in the Old World. Unfortunately though, those leagues are not without their own difficulties.
Michel Platini is battling with the various federations in his constituency to introduce more stringent financial regulations on clubs. The unfettered capitalism that has existed in England, Spain and Italy has lead to irresponsible spending which is threatening the existence of several large clubs. Can you say Pompey or Valencia? The Scottish league is barely solvent and far too reliant on the success of Celtic and Rangers.
Nor do I believe that MLS could rely on European clubs to be good business partners in developing talent. They can’t even trust one another. One need only look at the transfer ban that was levelled on Chelsea over the Gael Kakuta deal.
As for the current MLS calendar, I don’t see any benefit to changing it for quite some time. While the humid summer climate is a detriment to the success of a club in Arizona or South Florida (this was the true reason for the demise of the Fusion, not failure to market to Latinos), the winter weather would be just too brutal for the majority of the current franchises. Retractable domed stadia would be a necessity in fourteen of the current and confirmed expansion markets. MLS is not ready for that kind of expense. Nor is a split season an option. The NFL, NBA and NHL would draw away too many fans for soccer to risk a month long hiatus and that is the minimum amount of time that would be feasible.
It is, however, a good idea for MLS to build stronger relationships with more established leagues. They would be better off staying in the Western Hemisphere, though. There is already a developing bond in existence with the Mexican league, as evidenced by the success of Chivas USA. As well, the CONCACAF Champions’ League has exposed the league to young players in Central America and the Caribbean. The South American leagues schedule is close to parallel with MLS and it would be nice to see CONCACAF and CONMEBOL form a combined Champions’ League. There would be enough teams under that scenario to introduce a second tier competition, much like the Europa League.
Personally, I am of the opinion that MLS would be wise to halt its expansion at twenty franchises. To have more clubs than that would spread the limited talent available under the current budget restrictions too far. Nor is promotion and relegation a realistic prospect in North America. The continent is just too vast. Travel expenses for lower tier clubs on limited revenues would be devastating. Beyond the eighteen clubs now in existence (including Vancouver and Portland), I think there are very few viable markets remaining. Montreal is a possibility and New York can certainly support a second team. A big Apple derby would be tasty! Other than that, perhaps a club in the Carolinas.
Happily, the league is committed to having its clubs in soccer specific stadia. Stadia have much to do with the culture of the game. Tradition develops over time, of course, but even given that, there is a decidedly different feel between a match at Old Trafford as opposed to St. James’ Park, between the Bernabeu and the Nou Camp and the Azteca and Saprissa Stadium. MLS need not look to Europe or any other place to develop its soccer culture. All it need do is continue to improve the calibre of play and provide more grounds like Crew Stadium, the Home Depot and now Red Bull Arena. The fans will take care of the rest.
I am in agreement with you that the centralized ownership prevents dynasties. As unfair as it might seem, parity makes for bad business. More people watch the Premier League, Serie A and La Liga because of the dominance of a few clubs. MLS, however, is still in its infancy and can only realistically hope for a small share of the pie in its market. Overall, if the league continues to take baby steps in its growth, maintain its commitment to developing young North American talent and keep its eye on the bottom line, it will be fine. When the league is firmly established and its revenue stream is strong, then it can allow its franchises the financial freedom to fly on their own.
Posted by martin.whitehat | 30 March, 2010, 17:21Youth is not an issue with MLS. MLS teams are required to operate academies which develop young players and teams are able to sign their own prospects to the senior team. The New York Red Bulls have signed two strikers out of their own homegrown academy and they’ve been successful in national and international tournaments with their academy teams. MLS signed the youngest pro player in American history when Freddy Adu signed a contract with the league at the age of 14. MLS also needs to have single-entity structure instead of individual teams owning contracts because soccer is not a native sport of the US and we need to keep costs low to continue to operate. Soccer is gaining a foothold in the US because of the influence of MLS, but it hasn’t gotten to the point where we can let wages run wild like in Europe. I also like the salary cap in MLS because it makes it so any team can possibly win the league, not just three or four teams per league like in Europe.
Posted by irishapple21 | 31 March, 2010, 00:57Thanks for the comments – just noticed they were in the queue waiting to be approved, that’s why they’ve not come up beforehand!
@bud – I wasn’t suggesting the Red Bull Arena was a good start for soccer specific stadiums I was saying soccer specific stadiums were a good start for MLS – out of all the actions they could take, they are definitely doing it correctly in that sense.
@American Football – Yeah I had heard that the attendances and frenzy is already there in MLS, I just don’t feel it touches everyone like it does in Europe. Turning out on matchday is one thing but in most English places for example it’s hard to get away from football (I’m not complaining). In contrast I felt it was easy to get away from football in the US.
http://www.worldfootballcolumns.com/2009/07/30/matchday-la-galaxy-vs-houston-dynamo/
I wrote this article last summer after I went to a Galaxy game, I was disappointed but I know it’s not a true representation of the whole of MLS – hopefully one day I’ll get to go to another game and given the chance to be impressed.
Posted by Steven Jones | 5 April, 2010, 17:23I read an article recently, will look for a link which contained facets of an interview with Don Garber. He stated that the salary cap was an absolute necessity to encourage profitability in the sport, a key selling point to investor’s was the potential for long term growth. It seems to have been successful so far and apparently the cap is perpetually reviewed – which means the clubs can all grow at once.
In some ways you have to admire the centralized ownership and salary capping, and so the prevention of super teams forming and killing/leaving the league. The two Glasgow giants have threatened to leave the SPL for decades now having made Scottish football a perennial two horse race. Interestingly as well, the other teams attempted to combat this by bringing in low quality players from abroad, so ultimately depleting the talent available to the national team as well. The same has happened in England to a lesser extent. MLS would do well to focus on bringing through young American talent in my opinion.
Perhaps the MLS clubs that have academies should now form an academy league of sorts as well. Tie-ins with local universities could be appropriate letting the clubs retain ownership of developed players, but not having the players miss out on collegiate football, which is improving in standard rapidly as well. The other good thing about centralized ownership in a developmental sense is that funds for grass roots football should always be available if the people at the top have long term ambitions for football as a whole in the US.
Posted by Steve Atkinson | 7 April, 2010, 11:17I wish that one day an American or a Canadian team could play in the UCL or Europa league, but I guess that’s not possible in my time though I’m still young. If country like Ukrain can have a team that qualfies for UCL get to the final stages surely a team in northamerica could shine in these amazing tournments.
Posted by hashem | 17 March, 2011, 03:41Even with today’s technology, travel would be a killer to such a competition but we do have our own Champions League, which is getting down to the nitty-gritty as we speak. Here is WFC’s preview of the CONCACAF CL semi-final round. The first legs were played this week, so keep an eye out for our report on those games. It should be out on Friday or Saturday. Then, of course, the winner may be matched with their UEFA counterpart in the Club World Cup next December.
Posted by Martin Palazzotto | 17 March, 2011, 15:01