The Revs coming back to win demonstrated a little justice too, because Garrido 100% should have been sent off for that elbow early on.
MLS 2014: The U$MNT Comes Home
- Thread starter Titans Bastard
- Start date
Titans Bastard said:
My point about Brazil and Argentina wasn't so much about their quality, but more that they are large geographic countries that support a ton of clubs. In this regard, the population difference between the two makes for an interesting comparison (Brazil with 200,000,000 and Argentina with 42,000,000).
And I'm willing to defer to your expertise re table vs. playoffs. How would you change the current playoff format though?
IMHO, we don't want anything to do with how CBF in Brazil runs its leagues: state championships, multiple leagues, 80 matches a year for some teams, corruption, match-fixing, players not getting paid. It's awful and their attendance suffers. MLS has better attendance than the Brazil's first division
I read a story that I now can't find about the people that actually give a crap about making Brazilian football better looking at the stability of MLS with jealousy. According to this story, Brazil's top 24 teams are $2b in debt.
I read a story that I now can't find about the people that actually give a crap about making Brazilian football better looking at the stability of MLS with jealousy. According to this story, Brazil's top 24 teams are $2b in debt.
Something that's being lost in the pro/rel conversation is the negative impact expansion could have on the domestic game. The US simply doesn't have the depth of soccer players to support much more expansion at the time being. Even as budgets increase and more top-notch/expensive players are brought in, the domestic-player requirements of the league will make the general quality suffer.
No one wants to see most teams trotting out 4-5 guys in a gameday lineup that will never even sniff a USMNT callup player with a bunch of talented footballers. That happens to an extent now and will only get worse with expansion. Even if the league can attract more top talent, the talent disparity and quality will suffer immensely. Unless the American youth system suddenly catches fire or the league doesn't care about domestic player requirements (which I'm actually OK with).
No one wants to see most teams trotting out 4-5 guys in a gameday lineup that will never even sniff a USMNT callup player with a bunch of talented footballers. That happens to an extent now and will only get worse with expansion. Even if the league can attract more top talent, the talent disparity and quality will suffer immensely. Unless the American youth system suddenly catches fire or the league doesn't care about domestic player requirements (which I'm actually OK with).
Mr. Wednesday said:
Re. #1, my position is that MLS is already not a top-level league on the sports landscape. In practice, I just don't think anybody who would care about an MLS team wouldn't care if that same team was in MLS2, especially if the leagues are set up from the beginning almost as divisions of one top-level organization. To casual US sports fans it will be meaningless semantics; to any real MLS fans the distinction will be important but nothing to change allegiances over.
Re. #2, it solves a major problem: the MLS regular season is essentially meaningless. The body of work means something - good teams float to the top half, mostly - but the value of each individual match is nebulous, which sucks for fans. Compare that to the NFL, college football or the EPL, where each regular season match has a quantifiable, easy to understand importance that story lines can be built around. This gigantic problem could be solved by the combination of a more balanced schedule and closed pro-rel. Then almost every match would have a value that would excite fans and drive narrative around the entire game in the US.
Pxer said:
It actually speaks well of US development that the quality of the league has increased somewhat over the last 10 years despite doubling in size from 10 to 20 clubs. Additional expansion will water down the player pool, but at the same time the player pool seems to be growing. Also, having more professional entities investing in player development will help. MLS was spending $0 on player development not long ago - now it's $30m and growing. Between the academies and the USL Pro partnership bridging the gap between the U18s and the first team, I think we're going to start seeing some results in the relatively near future -- and bringing more actors into this world will only help.
But ultimately, though, I agree with you -- no matter how strong the overall pool of American players is, there will be an appeal to consolidating the stronger half of that pool into a top division league, which would make it significantly easier to compete with other top leagues around the world.
The question is whether the conflict between (a)the desire to expand to more markets and (b)the desire to maintain a strong a top-level league as possible will be enough to overcome the institutional challenges of implementing pro/rel. Some people will swear up and down that it will never, ever, ever happen. I'm not one of those people, but I think it will be at least 10-15 years before the conversation is even really worth having beyond the idle daydream level.
Pxer said:
"USMNT caliber" is relative to the quality of the player pool. I think there will always be 4-5 players in the lineup who will never sniff a callup just because there are only so many USMNT spots to go around. Bundesliga clubs probably start 4-5 Germans who will never get close to the national team, but that's okay.
I would be opposed to loosening domestic player requirements. Too many MLS clubs have shown that they'll take the lazy way out and sign mediocre foreigners instead of developing domestic talent. Of course, bringing in good foreign players is a boon to the league and raises the level for everyone, but I think the balance is more or less fine right now. Teams can already sign eight foreigners and often that translates to more because players with green cards don't count.
Zososoxfan said:
I really like the somewhat recent decision to have the team with a better regular season record host MLS Cup, for both competitive and atmospheric reasons.
The problem is that the Conference Semifinals and Conference Finals are both home-and-away. The higher seed gets to play the second leg at home and therefore gets to play extra time at home, if it comes to that, but that's really not much of an advantage.
Reducing both series to one game hosted by the higher seed would make it a little more arbitrary (90 mins vs. 180 mins) but would confer a greater advantage on the higher seed, which I like. It would compress the playoffs a bit and reduce the number of games, which the league might look at as a negative, but on the bright side it would free up calendar space to allow the league to plan around FIFA dates without scheduling too many midweek games. It would also allow the league more breathing room to schedule around CCL dates for participating teams.
Just to throw this out there: you could make the lowest seed "climb the ladder:" #5 visits #4; winner visits #3; winner visits #2; winner visits #1. That still gives everyone something to play for but also gives a huge advantage to the regular season conference champion. I want to say the NWSL did something like this their first year.
dirtynine said:
As a Sounders fan I have a hard time believing this. For the bottom clubs the regular season is pointless, but it sure as hell isn't for teams fighting for either the supporters shield or a playoff berth. Just like a champions league berth is important for Premier League teams. The Sounders have already clinched a playoff spot and won the US Open, but I still care about trying to be the first team to win the triple of US Open, Supporters Shield and MLS champion.
To me this is a better argument for some kind of punishment as a substitute for relegation. The bottom teams really are playing for nothing. Maybe the bottom four teams of the previous year should be forced to play their last home game of the year as an away game instead.
moly99 said:
Sounders fans have it as good as anyone, of course - but that doesn't change the fact that the importance of any particular game is currently hard to quantify. Yes, a win > draw > loss, but with an unbalanced schedule, most teams making the playoffs, and no incentive for teams to avoid mediocrity, you rarely get straightforward scenarios where a single game is obviously the lynchpin to something for both teams. Games need built-in story lines. Yes, you want to beat Portland because they're Portland, but that kind of story only works consistently with best-case scenarios like a Seattle fanbase. Imagine a random matchup - Crew/Whitecaps, say - late in the season, with both hovering around the fringes of the playoffs. There's no sense beyond a vague one that "winning is better" for anyone to latch on to. Yes, diehards on both sides will act like diehards, but to the casual sports fan / soccer-curious fan it might as well be an exhibition.
Now imagine that some type of relegation threatened both below, playoffs beckoned above, and the two clubs were in direct competition with each other in some kind of a balanced system. Storylines would instantly get tighter, casual fans would have something to understand and latch on to.
Titans Bastard said:
It would be incredible if MLS went further and made the MLS Cup itself a home-and-away 2-legged series. I know they probably want to avoid the optics of someone winning with a "tie" (via away goals) but the built-in drama would be intense.
dirtynine said:
Both the Whitecaps and Crew are playing for their seeding in the playoffs. You can argue that seeding doesn't matter much, but it certainly keeps NBA fans engaged. You can argue that the number of matches played diminishes the importance of each one, but that's the same with Europe and a single table champion.
I ideally think it should be:
- top third: playoff seeding
- middle third: fighting to get into playoffs and avoid penalties
- bottom third: trying to get out of penalty zone
Relegation better NOT happen, if only to make sure U$MNT players aren't trapped in ML$2 for a season. It's bad enough they've been lured into the ML$ trap in the first place; a season of Michael Bradley plying his trade in a second-division ML$ might actually drive me insane.
I'm pretty sure every USMNT player will have a relegation clause in their contract, or will push to be transferred if the team is relegated. That's another plus of pro-rel, all the good teams play each other more, and the good players play comparable quality more.
All penalties do is bake in a class system in the league, where losing turns into a vicious cycle that's even harder to get out of than it is now. One of the things that I think MLS gets right is that the amount of class-ism in the league is relatively low (it's gotten worse with the DP stuff set up for LA's benefit) and dynastic success tends to revolve around good team-building and good coaching, such that an underperformer is only a few years and the right acquisitions away from a run at MLS Cup.moly99 said:
The only true outsider that's crashed the top of the EPL in the last ~15 years is Al-Citeh, and they've done it on the back of cubic mega-petro-pounds.
Awesome Fossum said:
This method would do the best job of conferring seed advantage, but would the top seeds essentially be "iced" having to wait so long to play their games?
soxfan121 said:
Yes, clearly, having a team of Premier League megastars is the key to success. "MLS is unequivocally bad for the national team" is a lazy trope that's not supported by any appreciable amount of evidence.
dirtynine said:
I'm struggling to see how this creates more meaningful games than having playoffs with no pro/rel does. In both systems, there's one arbitrary point in the standings that teams are fighting to get above, and that fight creates meaning / drama.
Anyway, from a fan's perspective, I do think pro/rel is cool in principle, but I'm having a hard time seeing how it would be good for business, and that's what's going to determine what happens in the end. Maybe closed pro / rel gives you greater capacity to expand the league, but then you're counting on the fact that you can run a profitable minor league, when you're just barely getting there with the top-flight league.
Maybe 10 - 20 years from now, but I wouldn't expect it. Then again, back in 1996, I thought we were going to have shootouts, countdown clocks, jock rock, 3-game playoff series, and cavernous football stadiums (oh, wait) forever, so I have to admit that the league's willingness to take risks in departing from the traditional American sports model has been greater than I've expected.
nickandemmasuncle said:
You might want to save the sarcasm for a post where you're not misusing the word "trope". And terrific strawman with the link, just solid work right there.
National teams with players who compete at the highest levels win tournaments. Here's my evidence. I look forward to your well-researched and bullshit-free reply.
Mr. Wednesday said:
It's not one or the other, though. MLS can have a salary cap and a competitive league while at the same time having benefits for success (the playoffs) and punishments for failure. Punishments don't need to be as ruinous as relegation. It could even be as painless as forcing the bottom two teams to hang up a "banner of shame" in their stadium the next year.
The point is that there needs to be some sort of humiliation applied to the Chivas USA's of the league to give their fan bases something to root for (avoiding the humiliation) and the owners extra incentive to improve their teams at least a little bit.
College football is messed up. But tonight there's a game between 6-0 teams that has clear, season-altering ramifications for each. The buzz and storylines are pulling in all kinds of people that just glance at or "kind of" pay attention to NCAA football during the year. That's the kind of regular season matchup MLS struggles to find in its current incarnation. (Baseball used to have more of these games before unbalanced/interleague/expanded playoffs too. I miss them just the same.)
soxfan121 said:
Definition b. And even if you hadn't completely missed the mark there, you'd still be the guy who criticizes people's diction on internet message boards, which is not ideal.
soxfan121 said:
1. Correlation <> causation.
2. The USMNT's best World Cup performance in the modern era was with an MLS-heavy squad.
3. Guys who go to Europe don't magically get sprinkled with European fairy dust that makes them World Cup winners. At 27 years old, Michael Bradley pretty much is what he is as a player. His development is over. Playing regularly against better competition might make him, what, a little sharper, and therefore maybe 5% - 10% better in the best-case scenario? Is that really going to make the difference for us? And then what about the worst-case scenario? Is Jozy really better off eating shit at Sunderland than he would be starting for NYRB? Is Juan Agudelo really better off doing whatever the hell he did instead of staying with the Revs? And is the national team better off for it in either of those cases? There are plenty of other examples.
So yeah, under the right circumstances, it can benefit the national team for guys to play in the top European leagues, but 3) shows it's far from a no-brainer, and 2) shows that it's certainly possible to build a pretty damn good team from MLS players. We wouldn't have been out of place in the WC semifinals in 2002 with a team that relied heavily on MLS, and that's back when the league was of far poorer quality than it is now.
Anyway, I'm not sure why you feel the need to come into this thread and piss on people's corn flakes when you don't have much of an interest in MLS, but whatever. It's a free internet, I guess. You'd probably be mildly annoyed if I popped up in some Premier League threads to talk about why I find that league barely watchable.
nickandemmasuncle said:
I don't want to speak for soxfan, but I think this is what it boils down to.
For people who believe the success of MLS is necessary to convince more American athletes to play soccer instead of football or basketball the cost of losing 5-10% of Michael Bradley's potential is worth it. For those who think that the same thing will be accomplished by Americans following the foreign Premier League, it doesn't matter much whether MLS is a success or not (at least in the short term.)
It's definitely a drawback, but I think the advantages are overwhelming. Would any team really prefer having to play an additional elimination game just to help prevent rust?Titans Bastard said:
You could also compress the layoff to just two weeks for the #1 -- 5 plays 4 on a Wednesday, winner plays 3 on Saturday, winner plays 2 on Wednesday, and the conference final is on Saturday/Sunday. That's a brutal schedule for the 5 or the 4, should they keep winning, but again, all the more reason to finish with a higher seed.
soxfan121 said:
Uh, OK. Thanks, man. You too.
Just to tie a bow around this, since you're not going to offer a counterargument...if someone could show me that a significant majority of US players who move from MLS to bigger leagues in Europe end up making a markedly better contribution to the national team after doing so, or that a significant majority of US players who go back from Europe to MLS make a markedly poorer contribution to the national team after doing so, maybe there would be something to discuss. But it's a completely mixed bag. For every Michael Bradley there's a Brek Shea. For every Tony Sanneh there's a Tim Ream, or a Michael Parkhurst.
Shipping US players to Europe isn't universally good for the national team, and bringing US players back from Europe isn't universally bad. This really shouldn't be controversial.
Shipping everyone to Europe probably isn't best, however I agree with Klinsmaan that players like Bradley in particular are doing themselves a disservice coming back. Once you are at that level you should be competing at it and challenging yourself. Taking a comfy gig for the check and to be close to home is going to result in a leveling off.
As to MLS growth... I don't see it, I mean it can get better, and bigger, but it is never going to be a top league because the best European, African and South American players aren't coming to play in the MLS when they can go to Europe go to top teams and play Champions League. A few top players probably doesn't do much to drive people to watch MLS. People who have an interest in soccer are going to watch the top leagues, I don't see that a slightly better domestic league is going to be a big draw. If anything I think more people would get into soccer if the US national team is better, and if they see US players in major roles at the best clubs in the world.
If Jon Lester signed with the Adelaide Heat tomorrow it isn't going to make baseball fans in Australia flock to ABL games at the expense of watching MLB.
Edit- Adelaide Bite, the Heat play in Perth.
As to MLS growth... I don't see it, I mean it can get better, and bigger, but it is never going to be a top league because the best European, African and South American players aren't coming to play in the MLS when they can go to Europe go to top teams and play Champions League. A few top players probably doesn't do much to drive people to watch MLS. People who have an interest in soccer are going to watch the top leagues, I don't see that a slightly better domestic league is going to be a big draw. If anything I think more people would get into soccer if the US national team is better, and if they see US players in major roles at the best clubs in the world.
If Jon Lester signed with the Adelaide Heat tomorrow it isn't going to make baseball fans in Australia flock to ABL games at the expense of watching MLB.
Edit- Adelaide Bite, the Heat play in Perth.
It's definitely true that MLS will remain No. 5 (a number that excludes college sports and Nascar and golf, at that) for some time. But for many fans, myself included, having something local to follow trumps quality. In an increasingly globalized sports world, this is probably less true each year, but as somebody who has always defined the teams he follows by geography, I do put the Revs ahead of anything overseas from a soccer perspective. I don't think I'm the only such fan.
Anyway, that the club v country debate (in a very modified format, I recognize) is starting to get teeth and generate headlines is a good sign for soccer in general in the US. Not that this is the first time Jurgen has stoked these fires, but in a way it's nice to see Garber fight back, even if he sounds insane.
Now, for those of us who do like our MLS
, Revs look very likely to finish second in the East, meaning Nov. 8 or 9 for a home playoff game, meaning a bye week for the Patriots, meaning it probably won't look like a football field. Small victories!
(The second place spot assumes NY does not collect six points in its last two games, or that if they do, the Revs collect one. NY is playing the Crew right now.)
Anyway, that the club v country debate (in a very modified format, I recognize) is starting to get teeth and generate headlines is a good sign for soccer in general in the US. Not that this is the first time Jurgen has stoked these fires, but in a way it's nice to see Garber fight back, even if he sounds insane.
Now, for those of us who do like our MLS
, Revs look very likely to finish second in the East, meaning Nov. 8 or 9 for a home playoff game, meaning a bye week for the Patriots, meaning it probably won't look like a football field. Small victories!(The second place spot assumes NY does not collect six points in its last two games, or that if they do, the Revs collect one. NY is playing the Crew right now.)
Cellar-Door said:
I agree that a player like Bradley is more likely to be kept as sharp as possible in a big league in Europe than in MLS. However, I think Dempsey and Bradley are harmed by returning to MLS far less than they would have been if they had never gone to Europe in the first place. Bradley is also sharper at Toronto than he'd be if he were rooted to the bench at Roma. Of course, it's impossible to know what would have happened or who Roma would have acquired/sold if he had stayed, or whether he would have been at Roma at all.
I'm not trying to imply that you are saying this, but people far too often speak of "Europe" as a single experience, when the reality is far more complex. I don't mind Klinsmann weighing in on Bradley's decision, but it reasoning for decisions made by MLS/Bradley to make the deal happen should be obvious and Klinsmann's continued harping on the subject is tiresome and doesn't accomplish much other than needlessly antagonize NT players and people in MLS.
Cellar-Door said:
A lot can happen in 10-20 years. I can't say how MLS will stack up to top European leagues in 2034, but that's a hell of a long time. In the last 10 years, MLS has grown tremendously. Why wouldn't that growth continue? Basically, MLS has finally reached a point where almost all clubs have sound financials. Really only D.C. United is still a problem (even the Revs @ Gillette and NYCFC @ Yankee Stadium have stadium revenue streams locked down). The next focus is on player development and when that happens, I think the growth will only intensify.
Here's another way of looking at things. In 2004, MLS had 10 teams and had a total attendance of 2,172,528 (15,408 per game). In 2014, the league has 19 teams and is currently on pace to total 5,786,650 (19,035 per game). The median attendance is up by around 5,500 per game. So clearly, a lot more people are being driven to games.
I think the growth of MLS and the growth of interest as a whole has been obscured a bit in the Boston area simply because the Kraft family has done such a poor job of building the franchise here. It's definitely a Euro-first town.
Cellar-Door said:
Re: the growth issue, it's hard to say. I don't think the opportunity to play in the Champions League will be the deciding factor as much as the money will. My guess is that if some day, there's more cash to be made in MLS than in Europe, the best players will go to MLS, and the suits will find a way to get them into a meaningful international club competition that brings additional money / exposure / etc. Based on that assumption, I think the big question is whether MLS attendances and (especially) TV numbers will get to the point where there is enough money in the league to attract the world's best players en masse.
Youkilis vs Wild said:It's definitely true that MLS will remain No. 5 (a number that excludes college sports and Nascar and golf, at that) for some time. But for many fans, myself included, having something local to follow trumps quality. In an increasingly globalized sports world, this is probably less true each year, but as somebody who has always defined the teams he follows by geography, I do put the Revs ahead of anything overseas from a soccer perspective. I don't think I'm the only such fan.
Anyway, that the club v country debate (in a very modified format, I recognize) is starting to get teeth and generate headlines in the US is a good sign for soccer in general in the US. Not that this is the first time Jurgen has stoked these fires, but in a way it's nice to see Garber fight back, even if he sounds insane.
Now, for those of us who do like our MLS
(The second place spot assumes NY does not collect six points in its last two games, or that if they do, the Revs collect one. NY is playing the Crew right now.)
Couldn't agree more that local interest is more important than quality -- given some certain threshold level of quality -- and for me, MLS more than exceeds that threshold. It's really not a bad league at all.
Also, hadn't realized that the first-round home playoff game will likely be on the Pats' bye week. That's great news. Last year's home playoff game against SKC was a bit of an embarrassment with the football lines on the field. Hoping they end up against either of Columbus or NY, but the way the Revs have been going, I think they have a shot to go deep no matter who they play.
ETA: "likely"
Cellar-Door said:
It depends on how you define "top league." MLS will never be bigger than the Premier League or Bundesliga. But 30 years from now MLS will probably be better than Serie A and Ligue 1. If MLS is the fifth best league in the world, will it be worth watching?
The Nippon Baseball League is probably a better comparison than the Australian baseball system. (Football/soccer to baseball is tough because the player pool and number of fans is much lower for baseball.) They don't have the world's best players, but it's still a high quality league. if you lived in Osaka or Chiba, would you follow your local team or would you follow MLB?
I also dispute that quality of play is the ultimate deciding factor in the quality of spectator experience. Seattle's derby games with Portland have usually outdrawn their attendance for friendlies against Manchester United, Arsenal and Tottenham. The supporters experience is as big of a factor as the quality of the league.
Titans Bastard said:
Sadly, I'd have to agree. However it's not just Kraft. The Rev also suffer from:
- No downtown stadium, which really hurts supporters groups.
- The lack of a local rival. There's no vitriol between the Rev and Red Bulls to draw fan attention like the Sox and Yankees.
- Too many successful local teams. The Galaxy benefit from no NFL team in LA, the Timbers the same as well as MLB and the Sounders drew a lot of homeless Sonics fans.
nickandemmasuncle said:
Crew wins 3-0, clinching second place for the Revs.
It also sets up a pretty awesome three-way fight for third, fourth, and fifth to end the season.
KC is at 49 points, Columbus is at 49 as well, and NY is at 47. Right now, KC has the tiebreaker on the Crew.
KC plays NY Sunday night and a win will get them through. Columbus will play Philly earlier in the day. Pretty much every scenario is on the table in terms of who slots third, fourth, or fifth depending on the results, so the Revs opponent remains up in the air.
Slot that in with the Vancouver-Portland battle going into the final weekend and the LA-Seattle season-ending Supporters Shield doubleheader, and it's a pretty excellent final weekend for MLS.
moly99 said:
Which is a downfall of both the franchise model and sheer size of the United States. I don't expect either one to be ever addressed in a successful manner.
I'm not saying there are no rivalries. I'm saying by carving up the country into exclusive territories for franchise owners, they lose an organic aspect of rivalry that is found in club soccer. It clearly doesn't make rivalries impossible, but they can't just say that two teams are rivals because two investment groups bought franchises in a relatively close area.moly99 said:
Out of curiosity, which league do European advocates think is actually the best league in the world? I don't there is a real answer, to be honest.
The Premier League might have the best level of play overall, but none of the top 5 players in the world play in the league. Comparing MLB to the Premier League and MLS to the Australian Baseball League misses the fact that there isn't any league that dominates soccer/football the way MLB does in baseball. I'd say 85 of the top 100 baseball players in the world play in MLB, whereas the Premier League is more like 30 out of 100.
The Premier League might have the best level of play overall, but none of the top 5 players in the world play in the league. Comparing MLB to the Premier League and MLS to the Australian Baseball League misses the fact that there isn't any league that dominates soccer/football the way MLB does in baseball. I'd say 85 of the top 100 baseball players in the world play in MLB, whereas the Premier League is more like 30 out of 100.
Yes, it isn't exactly analogous because most American sports are ones nobody else plays. Thinking about it now I probably should have used Basketball, there are a bunch of decent leagues, but the NBA is king even there.moly99 said:
England, Spain, and Germany are the clear top 3 leagues. MLS is probably somewhere near 10? Italy, France, Netherlands, Russia probably Portugal are higher. Then we are somewhere in the basket with Mexico, Turkey, Ukraine, Brazil Belgium. Champion's League helps there, as it brings money into the system for all of these mid-level leagues.
Could we break into the group with the Dutch and the Russians? Maybe.
Also I think what I'm saying is being misinterpreted. I think MLS is great, I hope it does become a top 6 league. Even if it doesn't if I had a team nearby it would be fun to go to. I just think the idea of sacrificing National team quality to build the league isn't a good move. Elite players will go where the best play is. To go to the Basketball analogy. There are guys playing in Europe who could probably make a roster in the NBA, and some of them make more money in Europe. However the true elites of the European players come to the US, because that's the best league. Michael Bradley can start for a team at the top level where he plays against the level of player who he will face in major tournaments every week. The MLS doesn't have that, and likely never will.
TL
R- MLS is great, we should hope it grows. Having US players who can compete in the top 4 or 5 leagues come home and slum it isn't going to make that happen, and it will hurt the development of the US program.
The Galaxy really blew a golden chance in the SS race last night. They are still alive with the tie, but they now must win in Seattle. It would have been much easier to hold to their lead and have the luxury of tying the Sounders next weekend.
DC United's reserve team beat Tauro on the road last night to finish their group with a perfect record. Portland choked and lost to Olimpia 3-1, giving up two goals in the first four minutes. Olimpia goes through on H2H away goals.
Cruz Azul were also eliminated by Alajuelense. Only two Liga MX clubs are still alive, which is a historic low for the CCL.
Seven of the eight quarterfinalists are confirmed.
2 MLS (DC, Montreal)
2 Mexico (Club América, Pachuca)
2 Costa Rica (Herediano, Alajuelense)
1 Honduras (Olimpia)
SKC travels to Deportivo Saprissa to determine the eighth team. SKC could advance with a win, draw, or one-goal loss. A two goal loss will depend on away goals. 2-0 = Saprissa. 3-1 = drawing of lots. 4-2 or higher = KC. It's kind of scary how plausible it is that the group will be decided by a drawing of lots.
Cruz Azul were also eliminated by Alajuelense. Only two Liga MX clubs are still alive, which is a historic low for the CCL.
Seven of the eight quarterfinalists are confirmed.
2 MLS (DC, Montreal)
2 Mexico (Club América, Pachuca)
2 Costa Rica (Herediano, Alajuelense)
1 Honduras (Olimpia)
SKC travels to Deportivo Saprissa to determine the eighth team. SKC could advance with a win, draw, or one-goal loss. A two goal loss will depend on away goals. 2-0 = Saprissa. 3-1 = drawing of lots. 4-2 or higher = KC. It's kind of scary how plausible it is that the group will be decided by a drawing of lots.
Titans Bastard said:
Haven't been this pissed in some time with this club. They didn't start the regulars in what was the biggest match of the season IMO. I mean, who needs that allocation money, right? Now, they have to hope for a miracle to get into the playoffs to salvage this season. What a disaster from top to bottom with this club all year, from the FO, GM and Owner alike. Praying there are wholesale changes this offseason.
SoxFanInPdx said:
How much money are you guys paying Liam Ridgewell again?! Maybe I'm forgetting somebody, but I can't think of many teams that were successful with a core that consists almost entirely of foreign players.
I think it's a combination of:
1. Tough to find good value in European players outside the big stars like Henry and Keane. The worst is Championship-caliber players, who are usually good enough to play in MLS at least in some capacity, but tend to command larger salaries than they are worth within the context of the MLS salary cap.
2. There's better value in Latin America, but you never know how a player will adapt to the league. Physicality, travel, heat, cold - it's a different beast than other places.
No doubt it's been a frustrating season in Portland. The Timbers have definitely dug up some good players, but they seem to have just a few too many holes/flaws among their signees.
Titans Bastard said:
As a neutral, I'm mostly relieved that Seattle didn't win, or else we would have ended up with a final regular-season game on OTA network TV that was completely meaningless, instead of a head-to-head deciding game for a fairly legit honor.
On a related note, I'm really pleasantly surprised to see how much traction the Supporters' Shield is starting to get as something that matters to teams and fans. Last year seemed like a turning point, with the way the Red Bulls treated it as a major accomplishment, and this year it has some extra juice because it's come down to a pair of head-to-head games between two of the most popular teams in the league.
Would be nice to see that momentum maintained, so that we eventually end up with the best of both worlds, where winning the league (European-style) and winning the playoffs (US-style) are both a big deal. Would be even nicer if we had a balanced schedule to lend some more credibility to the SS, but I'm not holding my breath for that.
nickandemmasuncle said:
They shouldn't have a problem having the importance for the Supporters Shield to continue to gain steam. Most fans of the league also follow an international league that has multiple seasonal trophies that fans give importance to. The US Open Cup has never gained the prestige that most domestic trophies do. The regular season champion having a level of prestige attached to it would be a nice compliment to the playoff tournament.
I think an MLS team winning the CCL would also help with both the Supporters Shield and the US Open gaining traction, as they're both an avenue in. Though I sort of doubt the average MLS fan cares more about the CCL than they do the MLS season.Vinho Tinto said:
getting a team in the Club World Cup would be kinda cool though. European teams may not care a tone about it, but it would be a big deal to get an MLS team on the field with those kinds of clubs in a competitive atmosphere.
Infield Infidel said:
Huge. At the very least, it improves the sort of foreigners (as TB discussed above) who want to come to the league. At best, it kicks the league up a notch or two on the ladder and improvement in competition happens a little faster.
And when Bayern's B team wins 11-0, it'll be great for europhiles like me. ;-)
soxfan121 said:
So you have MLS getting past the quarterfinal against an AFC/CAF opponent? Excellent!
(That's something that Mexican clubs have failed to do three out of the last four years, actually.)
Garrido got a one week suspension handed down by the disciplinary committee.Arroyo Con Frijoles said:
SKC followed the Timbers out of the CCL with a two goal loss in Central America. Disappointing but not unexpected. The quarterfinals are set for the spring:
DC United vs. Alajuelense (CRC)
Montreal Impact vs. Pachuca (MEX)
Club América (MEX) vs. Deportivo Saprissa (CRC)
Olimpia (HON) vs. Herediano (CRC)
More Costa Rican clubs in the QF this year than either MLS or Liga MX, incidentally. 2014 is indeed the Year of the Ticos.
DC United vs. Alajuelense (CRC)
Montreal Impact vs. Pachuca (MEX)
Club América (MEX) vs. Deportivo Saprissa (CRC)
Olimpia (HON) vs. Herediano (CRC)
More Costa Rican clubs in the QF this year than either MLS or Liga MX, incidentally. 2014 is indeed the Year of the Ticos.