Avoiding the Drop

Morning, all.  This week has not been fun, at all, but I’ll say this.  I watched the L.A. Galaxy last night against Oita Trinita from the J-League (Japan), and while I don’t know much at all about the Japanese league, the Galaxy looked decent.  Of course, that was without both Landon Donovan and David Beckham, so that leads me into this morning’s post.  For our first project, the four of us have come up with 5 questions in roundtable format, regarding MLS 2009 (and beyond in some cases).  Enjoy.

Question 1 – David Beckham, Landon Donovan and the L.A. Galaxy – what’s the impact and the long-term outlook for the league’s “signature” franchise?

SexFabregas:  I don’t think Beckham is coming back, he tried it out over here and didn’t work out for him, he may be back after 2010, but not when he has a chance to play in another World Cup. Donovan may be back since there seems to be a logjam at Bayern that puts him as the fourth choice striker, but since he’s playing well he could have aspirations elsewhere in Europe so he can prove that he can actually play over there.

As for the long-term effects, the Galaxy were bottom feeders with them so they can’t really get much worse. The league seems to be in a little better position now than when Beckham came on board. Soccer has slowly become a more respectable sport in America over the last 2-3 years, and while Beckham may have had a part in a percentage of that, it’s certainly not the dominant factor.

Magnakai Haaskivi:  In spite of being the franchise everyone probably knows, having the highest home attendance record, and boasting the two biggest stars in the MLS, the Galaxy have been awful. Why? Well, Beckham, mostly. He’s the caliber of player that allows other players to get lazy, and in truth seemed to be playing lazy himself. Losing Beckham will, in reality, not be a big loss for the soccer team (the marketing department is a different issue entirely); yes, his passes open up spaces and his free kicks are fantastic, but he doesn’t defend for the Galaxy and doesn’t appear motivated. He’s a more charming version of Didier Drogba in that sense, and the Galaxy probably can finally concentrate on developing into a team without him, instead of fielding “David Beckham plus ten other guys” week in, week out.

As for Donovan, his big test will come tomorrow when Bayern Munich plays Cologne. Luca Toni is out of the line-up, Lukas Podolski’s leaving for Cologne at the end of the season, and Jurgen Klinsmann still hasn’t made a decision on Donovan. The stars are all aligning for Donovan to get a start and show what he can (or can’t) do. Klinsmann’s already said that he doesn’t necessarily see a spot for Donovan on the team (he’s a little old to be their fourth striker, apparently). Losing Donovan would be a bigger blow to the Galaxy; I always got the impression that he wanted to play there, that he liked it, and that he was a motivator and mentor for some of the younger guys.

thefuseproject:  Where Beckham is concerned, it doesn’t matter.  It’s a win/win situation for MLS.  Bringing Beckham to MLS didn’t drive any fans away from the league, it brought more in, and some will stay…win.  The amount of money brought in directly (Galaxy merchandise) and indirectly (higher advertising fees, increased gate receipts home and away, etc.) were, I believe, more than what was paid out to Beckham…win.  Now he’s gone (trust me, when AC Milan offers the right amount, he’s g-o-n-e) and the league hasn’t folded.

Donovan won’t end up with Bayern Munich…but he probably won’t be back in MLS any time soon either.  It doesn’t make sense for anyone involved.  If he comes back, he’s a European failure- again.  If he stays in Europe and succeeds, maybe he finally gets some respect from the “Landy Cakes” crowd (full disclosure:  I’m in that crowd).  It doesn’t make any sense for the Galaxy either- they were a last place team with him, and without him they can be that again- for less money.  As for MLS, if he comes back “the league doesn’t produce quality players.”  If he stays and does well, the league “does produce quality players.”  He stays.

And if they both come back?  The Galaxy still finish last.

TwoYellowsEqualRed:  Call me a fool, but I honestly believe that David Beckham did absolutely NO research about MLS before coming here.  He saw dollar signs.  He saw Los Angeles and Hollywood.  His wife saw all the money and beautiful people.  He never considered that his salary would kill the Galaxy’s chance to spend any significant money on players that might actually help them win.  He played at half speed the entire time he was here, he looked unmotivated, and he clearly realized that his chances of playing for England in 2010 and the chance to break the all-time England caps record would be in jeopardy if he continued on.  He’s gone, he won’t be back, and it’s okay.  The Galaxy sold a boatload of shirts and put a lot of asses in seats, which for a league like MLS was fantastic business.  Landon Donovan has finally grown up.  He’s matured, and he also realizes that if he’s truly going to be great on the world stage, he needed to go back to Europe.  I think he might have made a mistake in choosing a club like Bayern, loaded with talent and likely not to play him much at this point, but it remains to be seen how it will turn out.  He should insist on staying, much like Beckham is doing now.

Without them, the Galaxy can settle down.  Bruce Arena can assess what he’s got, make a decision on his full-time keeper, watch Edson Buddle continue to be quietly effective.  I think in the long run this will help the Galaxy to become much more balanced and actually play some defense.  I don’t think they’ll win the league this season, but assuming both lads don’t return, I think they’ll be in contention for a Western Conference playoff spot.

Question 2 - Should the MLS adopt a single table, and have relegation and promotion with the USL?

SexFabregas:  A single table would improve a few things in the league. It’s a small enough league that it doesn’t need to be separated into two categories, and would allow the league to avoid stuff like the Red Bulls being the West champions which allows ignorant naysayers the chance to point and laugh. It also differentiates the league from other sports in the US, and there aren’t any scheduling issues since schedules aren’t conference heavy.

Relegation would only cause the league to regress. While purists would enjoy seeing a relegation battle, if the casual fan has to worry if the team they’re watching will be playing in a second-tier league they’re not going to want to vest as much interest in that team. The only way relegation could work is if the already established teams are separated into two leagues and would still play each other throughout the season in Cup competitions and the like.

Magnakai Haaskivi:  The reason the teams were split into two divisons in the first place was to reduce travel times and travel expenses. For a league that needs to be incredibly cost conscious, those are the ways it stays afloat; MLS doesn’t enjoy the endless stream of cash that the NFL and NBA do, and anything that helps it stay afloat is worth keeping around.

As far as relegation goes, look, as an American soccer fan, I’m for it. I live in Cleveland; the City Stars are about to enjoy their first season in USL-1, which is pretty exciting. I’d love it if they had the option to be promoted into MLS. At the same time, though, that’s not in the best interests of MLS; the league is struggling to define their image, and having teams moving in and out of the league because “that’s how it’s done in Europe” isn’t a great plan. That system developed organically in Europe, not arbitrarily, and I don’t know if there’s enough quality soccer being played to warrant that system being adopted here right now.

thefuseproject:  As a “soccer purist,” this is what I want to see happen.  As an “American Soccer Realist,” I know it’s a long way off.  First, corporate sponsors/television are not going to commit money to what might, through relegation, end up being an “inferior” product.  Second, MLS clubs are not going to risk losing money by signing contracts with contingency clauses that pay them less if they are relegated.  Third, communities/ownership groups are not going to supporter soccer-specific stadiums if their MLS team suddenly finds itself hosting home matches against Charleston Battery or Carolina Railhawks.  Seeing these teams during the US Open Cup is one thing, in league play, it’s quiet another.  Finally, it’s just not time yet.  We need a generation of fans to grow up with a team, so that when relegation does happen, they won’t walk away, they’ll follow their team down to the USL and then hope to push them pack up as quickly as possible.  These fans exist in other countries, and they follow West Bromwich Albion.

TwoYellowsEqualRed:  At some point, MLS has to take the gloves off and go for it.  Now is not the time, the economy is bad, and they will need to hope and pray that their supporters entertainment dollars will still be coming their way.  But, if this league wants to be taken seriously on the world stage, and if they want to be able to compete for the best players in the world, they MUST take several steps.  One, they must go to a single table.  Two, they must adopt relegation and promotion with the USL.  This step will allow both leagues to get better, plus it would be hysterical to see a team like the Red Bulls or Galaxy playing some of the USL teams.  Third, they must adopt the Euro calendar and play from August to May.  Don’t give me the “winter weather” cities, I’ve been to Celtic Park in January and nothing is colder than that, trust me.  So yes, it has to happen, just not now.

Question 3 – Does the salary cap and relative lack of squad depth really put the MLS clubs behind the rest in Cup competitions, as evidenced by the poor showing in CONCACAF Champions League?

SexFabregas:  Yes, this is an issue that needs to be worked on in order to improve the standing of the league as a whole nationally and internationally. The league relies upon a rather smart model so as to avoid making the mistakes the NASL made, but that model needs to be reworked so that teams can compete on a wider scope. The more exposure teams can get the better.

One way to potentially fix this is to alter the designated player rule and divide it out to accommodate for 2 reasonably good players, these players would lack the star power of a Beckham or an Angel, but would provide 2 spots that would allow teams to go to another country and pay competitive wages for players that would be pretty decent. Two slightly above average Mexican players are going to improve your team more than one Beckham.

Magnakai Haaskivi:  The salary cap structure might be hurting MLS in the cups, but I think a bigger problem is simply the gulf in quality between the rosters of squads in CONCACAF and the rosters of MLS. I can’t imagine that it’s surprising to anyone that all four Mexican teams advanced to the quarterfinals; going back to the Champions Cup, Mexico’s won this tournament 24 times. The next closest country? Costa Rica, with six wins. América by themselves have won it five times. I’m not saying we should simply surrender now, but this is Mexico’s tournament; their national team may be a little bit of a mess right now, but to complain about how we finish is like Switzerland complaining about how their league isn’t competitive when compared to England.

Does the salary cap hamstring the U.S. from the outset? Maybe. On one hand, having more money would allow the U.S. to attract better players and better coaches; on the other hand, without strictly monitoring spending, the MLS wouldn’t even exist; in spite of what we’d all like, soccer’s still a niche sport here and they need to work hard to stay in the black. Loosening the purse strings so the squads could compete in international tournaments that don’t provide a lucrative financial reward may be cutting off your nose to spite your face.

thefuseproject:  Continuing on from the previous question, until there is a single table and relegation, it doesn’t really matter.  While the prestige and money that might come with success in these competitions would be nice, their true worth- in MLS and any other league- is giving additional meaning to the places in a single table set up.  In the MLS case, the top six teams all have some combination of things to play for in a single table (League Champion, CONCACAF Champions League, SuperLiga) and the bottom eight sides are trying to avoid relegation (they were only separated by 7 points last year).  Thus, until there is a reason to strengthen/deepen squads in the hope of avoiding relegation, there is no pressing need for teams to do so in order to improve their showing in the various cup competitions- they’re going to qualify anyway.  Any success in these competitions is a bonus.

TwoYellowsEqualRed:  Squad depth is a HUGE problem for MLS teams that are expected to compete in SuperLiga and the CONCACAF Champions League.  MLS, as I said, has to go for it at some point.  They have to take away the “league owned franchise” concept and allow the individual clubs to control their own destinies.  However, if the league needs to stay within a salary framework, there’s a great example to follow in this country, the NFL.  The NFL has it’s issues, to be sure, but the deal struck between the owners and the players in terms of the salary cap is as close to perfect as can be.  Each team has a salary minimum and maximum, with the idea being that all teams should be able to field a team capable of finishing with as many wins as losses.  This system would work for the MLS, but the owners have to be able to make their own choices, not Don Garber.  Until the squad sizes are increased and more money available to build the squads, this league will always be second-rate.

Question 4 - Is expansion of the league happening at the right pace? Are teams going to the right cities? Where should the next two teams be placed?

SexFabregas:  Slow and steady expansion is the right way to go, and the pace the league is going at right now is perfect. They should worry about diluting the talent pool a little bit, but getting yourself into more cities is probably more important for the league at this time. It will hurt them when going internationally(see #3) but you’re going to sell more merchandise and get more people interested if you’re in as many cities as possible. I think once the league reaches 20 teams, or even 18 in 2 years they should sit back and evaluate it and let teams grow before adding more.

Seattle and Philadelphia were two obvious and good choices for the league. The placement of the next two will be interesting and could go a long way in determining how the future of the league plays out. Put teams in the wrong cities and you could damage the league for a while, put them in the right cities and you set the league up for success. My personal opinion is that Miami and Vancouver should get the next two teams.

Magnakai Haaskivi:  Seattle and Philadelphia are great choices, but the MLS has been down the Miami path before. Professional soccer franchises in Florida just don’t have the local support to get going (the Tampa Bay Mutiny and Miami Fusion FC both went under back in 2001), and just because Barcelona wants one doesn’t mean the league should ignore the history of sports teams in that area.

I also think that Vancouver is a little too close to Seattle; it’s only about a three hour drive, and with Seattle being a new team I wonder if it’s better to not dilute the market. Then again, if it were a bid to bring the Whitecaps into the fold, you’d bring an established fan base into the league; that couldn’t be bad.

thefuseproject:  Expansion is happening at exactly the right pace.  It might seem slow to those of us who are anxious to see MLS reach 18-20 teams, but “slow and steady” is the way to go if the league is going to survive in the long term.  One look at the waning days of the NASL is sufficient to see the dangers of expanding too fast and relocating too many teams too often.

So far, the expansion teams are going to the right cities- Seattle and Philadelphia were excellent choices and have widespread grassroots.  Of those cities mentioned for the next expansion teams, two should be avoided at all costs:  Ottawa and Atlanta.  Neither has a great reputation as a profession sports city, never mind a “soccer city.”  Ottawa has twice failed to hold on to its CFL franchise and the Braves play in front of empty seats in the playoffs!  The next franchises should go to cities with soccer histories and devoted fan bases:  Portland, St. Louis, and Rochester, NY- ”Empire State Derby” anyone?

TwoYellowsEqualRed:  The league needs to curtail expansion for the time being, because the model that they have used with Philadelphia and St. Louis was “We need you to have money AND a soccer-specific stadium.”  Philadelphia was able to meet those conditions and build a stadium, St. Louis was not.  With credit drying up in the economic crisis, now is not the time to make demands for stadiums, the public won’t stand for it.  That being said, this crisis won’t last forever, and MLS should continue on to twenty teams.  I would say both St. Louis and Miami would be good choices, assuming the Barcelona is serious about helping Miami becoming viable.  Also, I would like to see Montreal be given a shot to have the Impact move up to MLS, because they clearly can draw supporters and would be a great rival for Toronto FC.  Philadelphia and Seattle were home run choices in my opinion, not just because I’ll be a season-ticket holder for the Philadelphia franchise.  Both are good sports cities and will come out to support these clubs.

Question 5 – Pick the following:  Who will win the Supporter’s Shield, the MLS Cup, the Golden Boot and who will be the surprise team of the year?

SexFabregas:  Supporters Shield: Chicago Fire
MLS Cup: NY Red Bull over Houston Dynamo
Golden Boot: Juan Pablo Angel
Surprise Team: Colorado Rapids
These are a little out there, but I’m not known for being rational all the time.

Magnakai Haaskivi:  Supporter’s Shield: Houston Dynamo
MLS Cup: Chicago Fire
Golden Boot: Juan Pablo Ángel
Surprise Team: Seattle Sounders

thefuseproject:  Supporters Shield:  Columbus
MLS Cup:  Columbus over Houston
Golden Boot:  Kenny Cooper
Surprise Team:  Seattle

TwoYellowsEqualRed:  Supporter’s Shield:  New England Revolution
MLS Cup:  Chicago Fire over New England Revolution
Golden Boot:  Dwayne DeRosario
Surprise Team:  DC United

Feel free to have at it in comments.  Cheers!