L.A. Times: Foreign soccer stars no longer putting down MLS

Status
Not open for further replies.
Has anyone noticed that most Americans who love to trash MLS are always fans of the big EU teams? How come you never see Brighton & Hove Albion or Deportivo Alaves fans over here? It's no wonder they're always dissapointed when they watch matches that don't involve billionaire teams.

Seriously, I know Americans are used to the best, but the hate MLS because it's new is hilarious and sad sometimes. I went to El Salvador a few years ago and despite the quality of the local league being nowhere close to Europe (or MLS for that matter). people still follow it and are still proud of being fan of their local teams. Soccer is soccer no matter what.
 
Real is a bit weird, as they could have just went with the English translation of Royal Salt Lake or something more traditional like the Salt Lake Elks or whatever, but from a marketing stand point, it just makes more sense to go with the Spanish naming.

As the league grows and garners the attention of fans of other leagues, particularly LA Liga and the EPL, it makes sense to give them a gateway into ours. Those markets are huge, and they would love a piece.



We've debated the FC/SC thing a lot in the American Soccer thread, and it really comes down to knowing the origins of the various games different countries refer to as "football" and if you really think that names like the "Lakers" or "Buccaneers" are really any better.

American Football is actually just Gridiron Football and European Football is just Soccer Football.

It's really only confusing if you don't understand the origin of the word Football.

The other argument is it not being "creative" enough while others like myself contend that our "creative" names are fucking stupid.


You all should turn on ESPN2 and Watch NYFC take on New England. Game is on right now. Yankee Stadium is packed.

I was listening to the game, (it's on the WFAN which is good), but man Yankees stadium is the worst football venue (all football) there is.

Has anyone noticed that most Americans who love to trash MLS are always fans of the big EU teams? How come you never see Brighton & Hove Albion or Deportivo Alaves fans over here? It's no wonder they're always dissapointed when they watch matches that don't involve billionaire teams.

Seriously, I know Americans are used to the best, but the hate MLS because it's new is hilarious and sad sometimes. I went to El Salvador a few years ago and despite the quality of the local league being nowhere close to Europe (or MLS for that matter). people still follow it and are still proud of being fan of their local teams. Soccer is soccer no matter what.

Some of the pushback is from triumphalism. Some of the metrics used here is so incredibly sketchy using average attendance when soccer has 17 homes games in MLS vs 41 home games for the NHL and the venues are smaller in the NHL. Don't get me wrong it's growing, but the evidence isn't there to support it beating the NHL.
 
Has anyone noticed that most Americans who love to trash MLS are always fans of the big EU teams? How come you never see Brighton & Hove Albion and Deportivo Alaves fans over here? It's no wonder they're always dissapointed when they watch matches that don't involve billionaire teams.

Seriously, I know Americans are used to the best, but the hate MLS because it's new is hilarious and sad sometimes. I went to El Salvador a few years ago and despite the quality of the local league being nowhere close to Europe (or MLS for that matter). people still follow it and are still proud of being fan of their local teams. Soccer is soccer no matter what.

The standard of football in MLS is gash, I am Hibernian FC supporter though and we are in the second tier of Scottish football so I know all about bad football. There's not much between some of the games I see here played to 1000 people and what's on offer in the MLS.

It's really difficult to watch teams that are about the same level as the club I support but with the odd mega star thrown in for no good reason, it makes the league come across as totally ridiculous.

The main problem is the way its constantly thrust down your throat from the media, it feels as if they just want to sell me MLS fan merchandise rather that make a league of good football teams.

The current way it works with weird draft system and wage cap but with certain exceptions is odd as well, it makes for really unbalanced teams.
 
Has anyone noticed that most Americans who love to trash MLS are always fans of the big EU teams? How come you never see Brighton & Hove Albion or Deportivo Alaves fans over here? It's no wonder they're always dissapointed when they watch matches that don't involve billionaire teams.

Seriously, I know Americans are used to the best, but the hate MLS because it's new is hilarious and sad sometimes. I went to El Salvador a few years ago and despite the quality of the local league being nowhere close to Europe (or MLS for that matter). people still follow it and are still proud of being fan of their local teams. Soccer is soccer no matter what.

While I do agree with you, the teams in El Salvador have long histories and are the only teams which represent their local communities (I'm a fan of Aguila btw). MLS is a very new league attempting to grow in a world of satellite television, in a country with a very short history of local professional soccer. Chances are, a fan of MLS is the first generation of his family to be a fan of that team.
 
I wonder how Americans would react to the concept of relegation which does not exist in their country.
As entertaining as it could be, advertising/marketing/merchandising execs will never let this happen in America. Smaller cities are just going to get associated minor league teams like baseball after all the cities that can support an MLS team get one.
 
I was listening to the game, (it's on the WFAN which is good), but man Yankees stadium is the worst football venue (all football) there is.

They placed the camera down the third base line and its like watching a game with binoculars. Still, it's temporary until the find a place in the 5 boroughs to create the new stadium and the game is fun to watch. David Villa is in form and fun to watch play off of Diskerud.
 
Geography 101

Washington dc is closer the Moscow than it is to Buenos Aires

North American teams forget it, it just wouldn't work on CET. Play Libertadores instead.

He's talking about Time Zones here, not geographic distance. And I agree with him.

What time would a Wednesday Champions League game between Chelsea and the Sounders Kick Off, if they wanted to capture the best TV audience? 1 PM Seattle time, for an 8PM London Kickoff? That's great for the European audience, but good luck getting fans in Century Link field for that one. Not to mention the jet-lag Chelsea would suffer in that hypothetical scenario - they'd need to leave on Monday to be acclimatized to the time differences by the Wednesday game, and then switch gears again the very next day to prepare for their weekend PL game. It's doable, but far from a good situation for either team.

Of course, geographic distance is a concern as well, which is why a midweek trip to Buenos Aires would be grueling for any U.S. based teams. But even if Supersonic air travel came back tomorrow, and DC to Moscow suddenly became a 3 hour flight, MLS teams will always be a better fit for Libertadores because of the Time Zones.

Besides, U.S. history fits right in with the Libertadores theme. Why would they want to join the European Oppressors league? XD

Has anyone noticed that most Americans who love to trash MLS are always fans of the big EU teams? How come you never see Brighton & Hove Albion or Deportivo Alaves fans over here? It's no wonder they're always dissapointed when they watch matches that don't involve billionaire teams.

I'm a Deportivo La Coruña fan, for what it's worth.

EDIT:
Advance some chapters and you will learn about time zones.

image.php
 
And now that the NYCFC/NE game is done, everyone should go watch Portland/LA. I think they said Portland is on their 70th straight sellout (of 70 home MLS matches), and I can appreciate a great atmosphere when I see one.
 
I'm watching it on Sky sports, the team names always make me laugh. It has all the atmosphere of a pre season friendly.

Portland 1-0 up now,dire defending from LA
 
To put the growth of MLS in perspective, go to any of the big sport websites (bleacher report, sbnation etc) and find the reporting on today's MLS games.

Yup, nothing on the front page...

Now let's find the soccer section (in a sub-menu!)

Nope, all European news.

Anything on Gothamist about the NYCF game? Nope.

Still a long, long way to go.
 

Not might, they're definitely getting a team in 2017, at the new NFL stadium:
http://mlsatlanta2017.com/

They have already surpassed 19,000 season ticket deposits sold, meaning less than 6,000 are left for a team that doesn't start playing for another two years. If you want to buy season tickets you should probably do so ASAP.

Oh wow I didn't think they would have already started selling tickets. Those are amazing numbers for something 2 years down the pipeline.
 
there's something about the sesame street mentality of MLS which makes me have to bite my tongue whenever some yank deploys their my first football analysis of the league's quality and prospects.

american football is a bizarre chimera of influences. can do inclusive liberal positivity meets blokey angloboos/cosplay ultras meets hypercommerical mountain dew sportsbowl.

they just had an interview with a manager on the side of the pitch at half time. mental.
 
there's something about the sesame street mentality of MLS which makes me have to bite my tongue whenever some yank deploys their my first football analysis of the league's quality and prospects.

american football is a bizarre chimera of influences. can do inclusive liberal positivity meets blokey angloboos/cosplay ultras meets hypercommerical mountain dew sportsbowl.

they just had an interview with a manager on the side of the pitch at half time. mental.

The names are what do me in.

Tampa Bay Wildcats Stallions Superstars

of course there has to be Wildcats
 
they just had an interview with a manager on the side of the pitch at half time. mental.

That's an American thing. A lot of sports here do that. In NASCAR, they talk to the drivers while they're driving. I've only seen it before the race but still, I think they'd want to focus more instead of chatting with some color commentator.
 
there's something about the sesame street mentality of MLS which makes me have to bite my tongue whenever some yank deploys their my first football analysis of the league's quality and prospects.

american football is a bizarre chimera of influences. can do inclusive liberal positivity meets blokey angloboos/cosplay ultras meets hypercommerical mountain dew sportsbowl.

they just had an interview with a manager on the side of the pitch at half time. mental.

what is mental is anyone finding a sideline interview mental. Not that the rest of the post makes any sense.

The names are what do me in.

Tampa Bay Wildcats Stallions Superstars

of course there has to be Wildcats

People have an issue with FC, European influences or nick names.Make up your mind.
 
Inter is short for Internazionale.

"This wonderful night will give us the colours for our crest: black and blue against a backdrop of gold stars. It will be called Internazionale [International], because we are brothers of the world."
—9 March 1908, Milan

Miami is diverse as fuck and naming the club after that same idea is not at all as bad as you think.

The biggest problem with teams being named in a similar fashion to Euro clubs is American ignorance.

The issue isn't that Murricans are ignorant and don't understand the glorious history of these Yuropean football clubs.

The issue is that you're naming an American team after a European club and all that does is make the American team look like it's trying to be a pale imitation of it's more famous European namesake. It doesn't make any sense at all, there's a reason why European basketball teams aren't named the Lakers.
 
The names are what do me in.

Tampa Bay Wildcats Stallions Superstars

of course there has to be Wildcats

In Murrica, it's traditional for the team to be officially named something other than the city it's based in. The Canadians do it too.

Seattle Seahawks
New York Yankees
Los Angeles Lakers
Toronto Maple Leafs

During it's single season of failure, the XFL had some of the best team names.

Los Angeles Xtreme
San Francisco Demons
New York-New Jersey Hitmen
Las Vegas Outlaws
 
I think there is a happy medium between traditional North American style team names and the kind you'd see in Europe without having to blatantly crib them completely. I like ones like LA Galaxy, Seattle Sounders, Philadelphia Union, even DC United since the word United has some cultural impact in the United States. The MLS started out with some really cheeseball names and I feel like now they've swung too far in the other direction.
 
What's with the RSL hate in here? Their support groups and stadium are fucking awesome.

I love MLS and having a team in SLC is awesome..

I know I know Real is fucking stupid.. But it's all we got
 
I think Orlando City is fine. I mean it's a bit weird because nobody refers to the city of Orlando as Orlando City, but at least they don't go too far. Better to use Soccer Club vs Football Club given we call it soccer here.
 
The issue isn't that Murricans are ignorant and don't understand the glorious history of these Yuropean football clubs.

This reads as needlessly over defensive.

The issue is that you're naming an American team after a European club and all that does is make the American team look like it's trying to be a pale imitation of it's more famous European namesake. It doesn't make any sense at all, there's a reason why European basketball teams aren't named the Lakers.

Read my other post to Nick Van Exel.

It's just different than what you are used to and the way you are responding to it says a bit about your opinion on such things.
 
Lol dude, that happened in London, Ontario not the US.
This happened in a preseason game in Ontario, Canada.

Ready to be amazed?

The MLS has teams in Canada.
Just ask this guy:
North American. 3 of the 20 clubs are in Canada.

Toronto FC and Vancouver Whitecaps are 2 and 5 in Attendance. Only beaten (and thoroughly) by the Seattle Sounders. LA Galaxy and Portland is 3rd and 4th.

So go tell him, and those teams, about how exclusively American the league is :)

Also:
ArrchVZCIAIJOjX.jpg
 
It feels like every World Cup is a bigger and bigger deal in the States. I could see the increased soccer fandom giving MLS a pretty huge following in 10 or so years.

Not only that, a lot of the old baseball fields I played on are now soccer fields. Soccer participation has never been higher. Even my younger cousins are all in soccer in Washington state. Same with people in BC. MLS is really popular even I've gone to several games. Not only do a lot of these Latin American and European and African players get to come to the states, but they are getting increased television exposure, and will be seen as the frontrunners in the league. You never know. Look at baseball in Japan, Taiwan, Latin America now. Look at Basketball in eastern Europe, Spain, Argentina, China. Sometimes it just clicks.
 
Giovinco could never cut it in real soccer, European physical hard ass soccer. This is not something I refuse to accept it's up for debate, as someone who has followed him for years. He is okay, but he was never ever great, he's a Balotelli that never got a chance to be overrated.
Yes, the physical grittiness of Serie A. LOL
 
The MLS is great because it's competitive. There is nothing I hate more than when a league is decided with more a few games left to play, it's so boring when you go into the final day and the top and the bottom have already been decided. I don't care how good a football Bayern play, watching them shit on teams week after week and then winning the league by like 12 points isn't appealing in the slightest. That's my I love the English lower leagues, and the MLS reminds me of them of from the standpoint of competitiveness, just with the added glitz and glamour of the Premier League sprinkled on top.
 
lol no. A salary capped team will never be as competitive payment wise as a non capped league. The thing about salary caps is that they are always decided by the owners, and the owners will never put it high enough to stave off European owners. Shit just look at MLB player salries compared to NFL player salaries. MLB pays much better despite bringing in less revenue than NFL.

Are you looking at top salaries or average salaries? Are you completely ignoring that MLB has a minor league system and the NFL, for all intents and purposes, doesn't? Are you ignoring that baseball teams have a roster that's a little less than half the size of an NFL roster? In other words, do you really know what you're talking about?
 
Yes, the physical grittiness of Serie A. LOLxDDD

Indeed, tougher than EPL. Not that Giovinco would've cut it in England, at best he could've left a mark in Bundesliga or Liga, easily France. He's just not physically fit for professional european soccer at high level.

He had his chances in Europe and he blew it, time and time again. He's just not that good.
 
Are you looking at top salaries or average salaries? Are you completely ignoring that MLB has a minor league system and the NFL, for all intents and purposes, doesn't? Are you ignoring that baseball teams have a roster that's a little less than half the size of an NFL roster? In other words, do you really know what you're talking about?

First of all I'm not sure why the minor league system matters since we are only talking about the top level of cometition.

But yeah in terms of average pay, MLB players make almost 2 million more per year on average than NFL players. The minimum for MLB players is 507K compared to the NFL's 420K. At the higher end there are 5 players that make over 20 mil per year in the NFL according to Sportrac compared to 30 in the MLB. Now obviously the higher end contracts will skew the average higher, but still at 1.1 mill the median salary for the MLB is higher than 770K for the NFL.

As for total payroll there are actually 7 teams that spend more on 25 players than the NFL salary cap of 143 mil. For 53 spots that 143 mil comes out to roughly 2.7 mil a player. Apply that average for the 25 man roster and you come out with a total of 67.5 million which would rank as the 28th highest MLB payroll.

Keep in mind again, that the NFL brings in significantly more revenue than the MLB.
 
The issue isn't that Murricans are ignorant and don't understand the glorious history of these Yuropean football clubs.

The issue is that you're naming an American team after a European club and all that does is make the American team look like it's trying to be a pale imitation of it's more famous European namesake. It doesn't make any sense at all, there's a reason why European basketball teams aren't named the Lakers.

I see it the same way as NPB teams being called the Giants and the Tigers(and originally they had a Pirates as well. The Yomiuri Giants basically wear the old New York Giants uniform as well. It's harmless tribute when a couple of teams are doing it, when it's half the league it looks a little poserish.

Not true at all.

You can't honestly be arguing that teams like Cesena, Verona, Freiburg, Paderborn can compete financially with Inter Milan and Bayern Munich?

You really think teams like Stoke and Hull ever have a chance of doing anything relevant in the history of the universe?

Small teams have not been able to compete in European soccer since the mid 90s.
 
Here is a better article, from ESPN:

Major League Soccer not there yet, but it's on the way to global legitimacy

What I found was, to some extent, what I was expecting. By accident rather than by design, I have spent much of the last two World Cups traipsing around after the U.S. national team. I saw all of their games in South Africa and all but one in Brazil. What struck me (especially last summer) was the fans; they sent more than any other country, bar the hosts, and their fervour was eye-catching.

That was enough to convince me that the old question -- when will America learn to love football? -- was now redundant. Twenty-two million watched Jurgen Klinsmann's team play Portugal in Brazil. That is twice as many people as there are in Portugal.

The U.S. has, at the last count, around 70 million inhabitants who are interested in the sport. That may not be a majority but that should not be the barometer of whether a country likes football or not; if it was, Britain would not count -- only 20.6 million watched the World Cup final here, less than a third of the UK's 64.1 million population. If you're not watching the World Cup final, you probably don't count as a football fan.

In Europe, liking football is an aspect of mainstream masculine culture. To be different -- to convey the idea that you eschew what is expected of you, that you are uniquely discerning in your interests -- it is necessary to express your disdain for football. Liking football is at odds with the fads and fashions of the posing hipster and the sneering chatterati.

The opposite is true in the States. There was long a feeling that soccer was somehow un-American -- witness Ann Coulter's attack on the sport being a sign of "moral decay" as World Cup fever took hold last summer -- which led, in turn, to it being imbued with a sort of counter-culture cool. Football, in New York and I would guess in the States as a whole, is young and urban and aspirational. It is Europhile and outward-looking. It is worldly, completely opposed to the world of soccer moms and minivans to which it was supposed to appeal 20 years ago.

It has long been a source of irritation in Europe that the U.S. did not care much for football. Convincing America to like football, like convincing America to like British music or films, was for a long time seen as a matter of national pride.

Yet there's something odd about it: now that America does like football, and in huge numbers, there is no sense of joy. There is only a slightly embittered feeling that they don't do it properly (they have playoffs and salary caps, the fools!) and a fairly widespread desire to suggest that it is all fake, plastic and doomed to fail.

It jars, largely, because people forget the journeys they have been on themselves. There was a time not that long ago when the major European clubs sneered at the Premier League. They thought it was a retirement home. They found its tactical naivety astounding. The very best players laughed at the very idea of going there in the prime of their careers. It was a lucrative retirement home. It was seen, in short, roughly as MLS is seen now. But it changed, and it changed fast.
...
Players can go to the U.S. knowing they will be paid regularly; that is not true in a host of European leagues. There are a huge number of players locked out of the Champions League who may well see New York or Los Angeles or Chicago as a rather nicer place to earn their keep than Sunderland or Rennes or Mainz. There is also the added benefit, if they stay long enough, of U.S. citizenship. To many players from across the world, that could prove to be a powerful lure.

Also:

going to a bar to watch nycfc play today wearing baby blue. fuck the haters, they'll be bandwagon in 10 years.

.
 
America will win one of the next four world cups. It's inevitable. Huge population size, unparalleled sporting culture, a massive sports/training infrastructure, and the growing popularity of the sport. An entire generation of kids will go through school realising it's a a better route to take than conventional American sports, as even if you don't "make it" you can still make a living in a decent league anywhere in the world. That and you don't need to be over 6'5" or be willing to get concussed every week like in basketball or US football respectively.
 
America will win one of the next four world cups. It's inevitable. Huge population size, unparalleled sporting culture, a massive sports/training infrastructure, and the growing popularity of the sport. An entire generation of kids will go through school realising it's a a better route to take than conventional American sports, as even if you don't "make it" you can still make a living in a decent league anywhere in the world. That and you don't need to be over 6'5" or be willing to get concussed every week like in basketball or US football respectively.

One of the next 4? No. One of the next 3 would basically mean we'd have an A-List superstar either on the team right now, or over the age of 14 or so (meaning far enough along that people would know who he is right now). I can see it happening somewhere between 20-40 years from now (in other words, in a generation or two from now), but not in the next 16.
 
Once the Montreal Impacts are worth watching, I'll believe you LA Times. Gave them 5 chances, and each time I witnessed some of the worst soccer playing I have ever seen. I swear my high school team played better and that's not an exaggeration.
 
America will win one of the next four world cups. It's inevitable. Huge population size, unparalleled sporting culture, a massive sports/training infrastructure, and the growing popularity of the sport. An entire generation of kids will go through school realising it's a a better route to take than conventional American sports, as even if you don't "make it" you can still make a living in a decent league anywhere in the world. That and you don't need to be over 6'5" or be willing to get concussed every week like in basketball or US football respectively.

The NCAA system makes it tough for kids to be as good as their European peers. Hopefully more athletes from the states can go get into the big European club's youth development programs.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom