No doubt - things are improving in MLS. And it is on its way to being a real league. Getting rid of Chivas was a big step; divesting the rest of Houston would be another step in the right direction. The NYCFC stuff is a bit distressing with the Chivas parallels but that may well just be a marketing faux pas and add talent (through deep pockets) to the league, another good sign.
I'm not anti-MLS forever; I am anti-MLS now. (in the same way, and for the same reasons, as Klinsmann)
MLS may indeed get there someday. But it indisputably is not the best place to develop USMNT players for the next World Cup cycle. The ideal development environment is part-Julian Green (best club, with the best coach), part-Rubio Rubin (starting 11, in a competitive league), part Aron Johannsson (club run by American legend, starting 11, competitive league), and part Emerson Hyndman (regular playing time in a competitive league).
I think LA might be nearing that kind of situation for developing players - good coach, quality teammates, development program that makes sense - but the overall level of play is still below the Eredivisie & English Championship and LA's players only get to train against, not play competitively with, LA. More expansion means another fractional decline in overall quality of play (in the short term), even with the Graybeards of Europe joining the league as 3 of the top 10 talented players in the league.
I've said it before and I'll say it again - I'm a USMNT. The goals of MLS and the USMNT are not aligned. MLS is, in my opinion, working against the USMNT with some of it's business initiatives, most importantly the squabbling over where players best develop with the guy who knows what it takes to win a World Cup. He might be a self-important jerk but he wants to win, so he's not suggesting the USMNT do things that will sabotage our program.