Friday Soccer Roundtable, Part 2

Hope you enjoyed the first batch of answers. Here's our second question, fresh out of the oven.

Where are the next two cities in which you would like to see MLS expand? Do you even think MLS should expand? Feel free to use any city in the US or Canada as a destination, even if an MLS franchise already exists there.

Ric: Where I would like to see as the next 2 cities is different from where they are likely to be.

In two weeks will be the deadline for applications for those who want to apply for a 2011 franchise (the next open availability). The next two cities, already approved are Seattle (2009) and Philadelphia (2010), making 16.

More teams are needed in the Midwest, so St. Louis is favored for the 17th city. Also, since there are 3 new Canadian cities competing for 2001, one of those is certainly possible for 2011. My best guess is that the west coast city of Vancouver would be the favorite of those, due in no small part to Steve Nash's participation. He is also involved in the Montreal effort, so that could go either way, but his name recognition and dedication says to me that MLS will want to fast track in that case.

The cities where I would most like to see teams are Miami and San Diego, but those will occur further into the future. I support all of the efforts, and feel that the table could and should go to 24 teams, with carefully managed growth.

Josh: Up here in Seattle, I'd love to see Portland get one of the teams -- although it's probably a bit of a long shot. It'd continue a long-lived and emotional rivalry between the two cities up here in the Pacific Northwest.

Portland calls itself Soccer Town U.S.A. and I'm sure the people there would embrace the team. The Timbers of the USL are a great draw. The city has only one other professional franchise, the Trailblazers of the NBA, and the league schedules are complete opposites. Not to mention no big colleges. So I'm confident the stands would be full and it would be a great fit.

Even if they need some public money, I believe they'd get it. Plus, MLS teams could go two-for-one on flights up here.

For the second team I'd say either St. Louis or Montreal. I could say Vancouver, but that's just getting greedy for the Northwest.

Another team in the Midwest seems a bit redundant, so I'll settle for Montreal. Some of the same arguments for Portland apply. It's a large market without a lot of competition from other professional sports teams. The NHL schedule is also opposite to MLS.

Plus, besides crazy hooligans, the other Canadian franchise is doing pretty well for itself.

Dave: As a USL club supporter, I'd like to see Vancouver and Portland get in next, because that would save my Carolina Railhawks a whole lot of money in travel costs. In fact, if USL clubs on the East Coast never have to travel further west than St. Paul and Austin, that has the potential to make USL even more competitive with MLS.

I'm wondering how much the success of USL clubs the CONCACAF Champions League will affect some cities' interest in moving up to MLS. Look at Montreal, for example. The Impact already have a 13,000-seat stadium that fills up regularly. They only have to outplay Vancouver and
Toronto a couple of times a year to get to the CONCACAF Champions League, and they look like a favorite to get through to the CCL knockout stage this year on current form. Would they trade that for a salary cap, a smaller roster and a visit from David Beckham once a year? Would that even make sense from an economic standpoint?

For U.S. cities, it probably would. Imagine for a moment, though, if a few millionaires with money to burn decided to buy into USL instead of MLS. After all, you could build a USL-1 club and a decent stadium from the ground up for far less than the $30M that MLS is asking for an
expansion fee, and you'd probably have enough left over to build a side quite capable of winning the U.S Open Cup and getting to the Champions League -- again, without the salary and roster constraints of MLS, where teams aren't deep enough to handle success.

You'd have to think that MLS has no choice but to increase its salary cap and roster size limit just to prevent something like that from happening.

ü75: If the MLS remains at it is set up now, I'll say that Portland and St. Louis deserve their shot. But I'll give myself some wiggle room in possibly adding a third to my argument.

First of all, I just want to posit that I think MLS will not become a top tier league unless it decides to regionalize. The US is a vast country, and too much of any potential profit goes to travel. That money could instead be used to lure CONCACAF's top players away from their national leagues, and to keep the American second-choice, those who currently go to, say, Denmark, within MLS. Without going too far down the road, I'll just say that the American big four --the leagues that can afford nationwide travel--started in that way. NBA in the Midwest, NFL the same as well as east coast, MLB was mostly an east coast enterprise, while NHL (in here for the sake of argument), had their Original Six all in close proximity to the Canadian-American border. When one considers that one matchup considered to be a regional rivalry--Chicago-Columbus--involves greater travel than the EPL's longest roadtrip--Portsmouth-Sunderland--you can see how the breadth of our country makes it hard for real rivalries to develop.

Regionalizing would not have to mean contraction of clubs, but instead a sort-of Ma Bell breakup, with a championship at the end. The two leagues, presumably East and West, would play each other only in a Championship, kind of like the AL and NL used to in baseball. This would greatly cut down on travel as well as possibly give rise to that MLS rarity--the away fan.

Enough digression. Portland is an obvious choice here. The Timbers have a long standing tradition, and a long-term rivalry with next year's newest MLS team in Seattle. They have a passionate fan base already installed, and, should they get out of the baseball park, would provide great atmosphere to the league. Think Toronto FC, but American.

St. Louis is a more sentimental choice. St. Louis was the original de facto home of soccer in the US. Bringing a team there would be a nod to the history if the sport in this country. A history that weaves back into the early parts of last century, and not only back to Paul Caligiuri sending us to World Cup '90.

The wiggle room is this: St. Louis should not be an expansion team, but instead the relocated team from Kansas City. KC has only moved backwards since their initial inclusion in the MLS. Think of their inclusion in the MLS as a thank you to Lamar Hunt. Unfortunately, the city never took to the team, and now they play in a minor-league baseball park on the western edge of urban KC. There has been some talk of the team moving to a new stadium in the Overland Park area, but no construction has started. At least they avoided moving to a high school football stadium, as was once thought.

So, if KC moves to St. Louis, where to put a new expansion team? NYC. Derbies are wonderful things, and despite the LA one getting tagged a Superclassico well before its time, that is a well-attended game, no matter the relative standings of the two teams. Also, as I think is important to the league, it would set up an actual rivalry on the East Coast, with away fans encouraged to trek across the city to support their team.

Friday Soccer Roundtable, Part 1

No links this morning, I've got something better...

It's Friday and odds are you're barely paying attention at work. Today you're in for a treat, a four-part roundtable featuring some of the best soccer writers on the series of tubes. We've got Mustafa Redonkulous from Deuce of Davenport, ü75 from Unprofessional Foul, Josh from The Beautiful Game, Dave from Dave's Football Blog and Ric from MVN.

Question #1: Let's start with the Premier League: They fielded the two finalists in last year's Champions League and three out of the four semifinalists. More billionaires are interested in buying a team in that league than any other in Europe. Will the Premier League begin to dominate Europe or is this just the ebb and flow of the game?

Mustafa Redonkulous: Seems to me that the Premier League is going to be on top for a while. Most top players want to go to England at some point in their careers. TV contracts are pumping more money than ever into the league. The most potential for worldwide exposure is in England as well.

If you look at the other major leagues in Europe, there isn't as much money or prestige beyond one or two teams. Ligue Uhh is nothing to speak of. The Bundesliga while getting better in terms of play doesn't have the exposure or money on the level of the Premier League. Team ownership in Spain seems to be a clusterf*ck with member owned teams, dicey elections and finances as well as supporters that make Newcastle's look almost rational. Italy...well who would want to mess with that? So shady. Serie A has been eclipsed by La Liga and the Premier League.

The fact is that the Premier League has more worldwide exposure, the best players (although that's debatable) and more money to be made than any other league. Owning a Premier League team is a status symbol. It also seems that it's easier to buy a team in England than on the continent. It's also easier to turn an above-average team into a big club. See Chelsea. That said, it's not easy. See Spurs and watch Man City. It's just easier in England.

Josh: I think last year was an anomaly. Despite a wealth of talent and resources, the English domination of 2007 won't be replicated like that year after year. The EPL teams were able to stay healthy throughout the Champions League season and some beneficial draws also played a part in their dominance.

I don't think either Chelsea or Manchester United will be as good this season.

Let's not forget that England has only won two Champions League titles in the last nine years. Only three times since 1985. The attention the English dominance received last year was due, in part, to how rare it is for one country to dominant as such.

But that said, the Premiership is clearly separating itself as far-and-away the top league in the world. In a short time these last couple years the prestige and allure of England has skyrocketed. Even Italian mainstays like Del Piero and Buffon have been linked strongly to the EPL.

It's a league that the best want to play in. And the money is starting to be distributed more evenly throughout the middle-of-the-pack teams. While it may not dominant like last year in European competition, English league soccer could be as strong as ever.

ü75: The EPL (suck it, Barclay's) may sit atop the heap for a while, but will not maintain that position long enough to be considered the long-term dominant league in Europe. Leagues, like the teams in them, have a tendency to bubble up to the top, then slide away as another usurps them. The way I see it, there are three reasons that this will happen to the EPL in European competition.

First, much is made of the billionaire's playground that the EPL has become. However, I don't think that the league will keep the interest of most of the new wave of owners for very long, save for one team. The reason being that there will always be something wonderful and new to go to the top of the list for money men. I'm guessing we see an average shelf-life of about 10 years for any of these owners before they divest themselves.

Also, if one of these teams wins the Champions League early into the tenure of new ownership, the luster will be lost even quicker. If, say, Chelsea had done so last season, then struggled, I think Abramovich would jump. And what if a single owner, a la Abramovich (hate to keep picking on Chelsea), runs into a financial, legal or health-related mess? You only need to look north of the border at the relationship of Brooks Mileson and Gretna to see just how tenuous time at the top can be if one guy is pulling all of the financial strings.

As for which team with rich ownership is in it for the long haul--Manchester United. Sick as it may make me to say it, the Glazer sons will be around long after their old man kicks the bucket. They are fans of the club from well before the time they bought in. Can Liverpool, Manchester City or Chelsea say the same for their owners? No.

Secondly, the English game does not lend itself to some of the excesses that other continental teams enjoy. Those teams get special dispensation from organizational bodies, the government, or, in the case of the Spanish clubs, from banks whose directors are in deep with the club. These types of breaks cannot be taken lightly. The difference in quality between these clubs is razor thin at this level, and free money or government turning a blind eye to shenanigans involving the running of these clubs may take continental teams over the top. As long as what happens doesn't make too many waves, it will be allowed to pass. The FA seems to have a bit more backbone than other associations, and this cannot help its teams in the long run.

Finally, and this ties in a little to other countries and their organizational bodies, the English league is tough. Sure, some games come out easier than others, but every game demands concentration and effort to get a result. While Real Madrid probably had little fear of Sporting Gijon midweek, the same cannot be said of Arsenal and Hull. Slip ups like Arsenal's threaten the possibility of Champions League play the next year. And while the cast of characters from England every year remains largely the same, much like the big continental leagues, the energy expended making sure that happens is greater. Simply put, the Champions League money is so necessary to run these clubs that reaching it is much more important than winning it.

I figure the EPL has about another five years of this level of strength before it goes belly up. Look for Spanish clubs--Real, Barcelona, and maybe Villareal, to take over at the top of Europe.

Dave: The Premier League is sort of like the NBA, in that football was created in England, and therefore its top league has all the glam and self-importance that goes along with it.

Is it really all of England that is on top right now, though, or is it just the Big Four? Look at the shattered dreams of Tottenham Hotspur and Newcastle and tell me anyone would want to be there right now. The Big Four are the Big Four because they're in the Champions League, and I think that carries far more prestige than any domestic league.

In the future, you'll see fewer top players going to England just for the sake of going to England. Many would probably prefer the prestige of European football over the glitz of English football, especially if it suits their style of play. Sure, players will ask themselves if they would rather be in Madrid or Middlesbrough on a Saturday night, but they'll also ask themselves which city offers them the best chance of letting them play on a Tuesday or Wednesday night. Which city do you think they'll pick then?

Open letter to future foreign MLS players

Dear Foreign Soccer Player,

Did you catch the Barcelona-Shakhtar Donetsk game yesterday? Barcelona won 2-1. Leo Messi scored the game-winner after a throw-in that Shakhtar believed should have gone to them: Shakhtar kicked the ball out of play because they had a man down, but the player was not truly injured and one could argue that Shakhtar were trying to run out the clock.

The circumstances around Shakhtar Donetsk's anger at Barcelona perfectly encapsulate the largest problem soccer will have gaining a foothold in American sports culture. Gamesmanship is nothing new to the U.S. but faking an injuy is anathema to the rugged ideal we place on our athletes. When talking to my friends who aren't soccer fans, diving invariably comes up as a major reason they can't watch the game. I understand that soccer's continuous gameplay and clock give more incentive for this kind of behavior, but such an excuse will not work here.

But don't think we're all Puritanical and want our athletes to act like robots (unless you're talking to a 80 year-old baseball fan). We love when players say outlandish things to rile up the other team or make up crazy celebrations when they score. Faking an injury and then bouncing up after the magic spray treatment? Not cool. We'll think you're a giant prima donna b*tch.

So, to recap: Trash talk all you want. When you score, come up with the most creative celebration possible, even if some find it offensive. Just stay off your back unless you're actually hurt and the fans will love you.

Love,
American Villan

Opening Whistle 10-2-08

Steven Gerrard cooks aromatic sea bream? I don't even know what that is. [Daily Star]

William Gallas would have made a great Steinbeck character. [The Run of Play]

An impassioned plea to bring MLS to the former Confederacy. [Gwinnett Herald]

I have to admit, I think I'd support this action. [MLS Rumors Rumors]

Wow, that's like the equivalent of $100,000 in European soccer. [KNBC]

The word of the day is...whine!

Wow, today is shaping up as Act Like a Brat Day in Europe.

Ernesto Bronzetti, Milan's scout in Spain, must really hate Ronaldinho. Days after #80 scored his first goal for AC Milan, a gamewinner against Inter, no less, Bronzetti has come forward to admit Arsenal's Emmanuel Adebayor was Milan's first choice.

How does this benefit Bronzetti in any way? If he had spun it to make it look like he did an excellent job of convincing the Milan brass that Ronnie's best days weren't over I could understand. This just sounds like he's denigrating his own region. Maybe he hates Spanish cuisine and he wants a transfer. Or a chianti is more palatable than a tempranillo. All I got. Your theories are welcome in the comments.

The Dutch are so tempermental at this age

WESLEY SNEIJDER: Robin, why are you such a big meaniehead? I wanted to kick the ball!


ROBIN VAN PERSIE: Well you can't, you're a poo face.

SNEIJDER: Nuh uh! I'm rubber, you're glue, whatever you say bounces off me and sticks to you.

VAN PERSIE: Noitdoesn't! Noitdoesn't! Before you said that I made myself invincible.

SNEIJDER: Yeah, well before that I made myself double invincible! Plus infinity!

VAN PERSIE: You still look like a butt.

/slapfight

/crying

/naptime

Images courtesy of The Sun, Futbol91 and Amy Sandoval

Opening Whistle 10-1-08

Commodore must have been a bigger video game system in England than the U.S. [The Best Eleven]

Demands rumored to include a bathtub full of cream cheese. At least now that's the rumor. [The Beautiful Game]

So sad, Slammin' Mike Ashley is only looking to make double what he paid for Newcastle instead of almost four times the amount. [The Original Winger]

It's a good thing when your national team's problems are the same as everyone else's and not, you know, all about getting your head blown off. [Guardian]

Mourinho is less funny ha-ha and more funny tragic. [Reuters]