Competing Regularly In CCL Requires Changes At League and National Level
Jonah Freedman lays out four solid points as to how to get MLS players and teams more prepared to compete in the CONCACAF Champions League on a regular basis. While it is true that the USA through MLS is a solid #2 in the region, some of this comes from being good but not great.The top teams of Honduras and Costa Rica have historically better than those in MLS (except this year).
This last format also helped MLS in that it pooled the Mexican sides from the quarterfinal on, and maybe that's why I see an advantage to one minor change to what Freedman suggests. Here's those four steps in brief:
- No Longer Be Assured to Host Gold Cup
- Reserve a DP Slot for a American or Canadian
- Host the Club World Cup
- Win Something Now
His first step makes a ton of sense. His second, though, needs a tweak, partly due to US Labor Law, but partly because that change would help make MLS sides even better. If MLS were to add another DP slot for just Americans that would be legal, but to include Canadians as well treads over labor laws and NAFTA. What could be done though is to have that slot be open to any play from a NAFTA nation, which includes Mexico. Sure, that wouldn't add a lot of talent to the MLS pool, but it would add a few players who have experience playing and maybe winning in Mexico. This is a great step and one that is similar to what Japan and Australia do, and both are doing fairly well in the Asian Champions League with all 6 of their teams alive in the group stage with 2 matches still to play.
Hosting the Club World Cup just makes sense.
The last tournament only averaged 25,000 attendees (yes, it gets to 40k+ in Japan) and was at a time that made marketing to the two largest consumers of soccer via television difficult (North America, Europe). If the USA or Canada were to host the CWC this would increase the profile of the tournament, just because more people would be able to see it live on television. That of course is a positive.
But let's not pretend that an MLS side would get to face the CONMEBOL or UEFA's best in the tournament, since those teams usually enter in the semis. Sure, the Colorado Rapids would beat the OFC's best team. But would they really be able to beat the best team of Africa or Asia? The better Mexican sides (and Saprissa) that have made the tournament without the play-in round have won 5 of their 7 matchups in the quarters, never won a semi-final, and only won the third place match twice. This equals what the AFC has done, and barely edges CAF. Would it really raise the profile of MLS to pound an amateur team from New Zealand and then lose to Gamba Osaka or TP Mazembe?
Long term, this helps the tournament, and likely helps MLS, but short term it might expose the League as still lacking.
Freedman also talks about winning now
But he puts it in an American soccer context. More apt would be to put it in the context of the US Open Cup, Voyageurs Cup and Supporters' Shield. These trophies garner entry into the tourney, and as Salt Lake has proven a deep run in the CCL can capture the imaginations of more fans than typical within the local market. Their run led to increased TV ratings, extra ticket sales and more media coverage locally then anything but the MLS Cup '09 title.
More teams taking these supposedly secondary trophies seriously, would not just help them qualify for the CCL, but also help raise the profile of the trophies themselves. Jason Kreis has already stated that he is gunning for the US Open Cup to get back to the CCL. It is obvious that teams like DC United, the Seattle Sounders and Portland Timbers will take it seriously. The Vancouver Whitecaps and Toronto FC are in the driver's seat for the Canadian Championship. A broad selection of teams competing at the continental level can only help the chances for a run.
These are simple steps, and while the first costs USSF money, the rest should in the end lead to greater incomes for USSF, MLS and SUM. More importantly to fans, they should lead to more runs like fans of Real Salt Lake got to enjoy this last year.
6 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
The tweak need not include Mexican players
They could arrange it in a way that is similar to the national slots on the team. American teams could have only an American DP while Canadian teams could have either an American or a Canadian DP. It gives a slight edge to the Canadian teams, but not enough that it would really effect the balance of power in MLS.
Adding in Mexican stars increases the potential DP pool and would also help MLS teams market to their Latino customers. However, that also means that plenty of them would be Mexican which dilutes the whole argument for improving the play of the USMNT.
Unless we gut the salary cap
and change the playoff schedule so the first elimination round isn’t during our preseason it’s going to be a long time before MLS teams routinely make the final.
Nos Audietis
Non-MLS teams aren't struggling during the group stages due to their pre-season
so why does that hurt MLS, but not them?
Cap issues will be an issue until MLS gets better tv ratings.
I am not a Supporter | I am not a Fan | I am a Sounder
Sounder At Heart
I'm willing to wait it out...
Eventually if MLS keeps the cap, the league will stay healthy, the cap number will gradually increase, and MLS teams will be spending as much as FMF teams. I think that CCL is a great tournament, but in terms of making league rules, I’m more concerned about maintaining parity while teams are trying to grow their fan bases.
Thoughts on hosting the Club World Cup
I’ve been wondering why we don’t put bids in for this for a while now. The bidding process for the CWC is significantly different than that of the World Cup. According to this article, it appears that they award hosting rights in two year blocks. I suspect it will stay that way until it is significantly more popular. According to this article, Japan was awarded the CWC for 2011 and 2012 as a bit of consolation for losing the World Cup bid. Where’s the US’s consolation?
According to Wikipedia, there have been anywhere from 1 to 3 stadiums used each year. This might mean it doesn’t make sense for the US as a whole to make a bid. What if instead, Cascadia made a bid to host the CWC? Or NE and NY?
If we ever did host the CWC in the US, as the host country we would be guaranteed one berth into the tournament. Imagine if we also had a team win the CCL that same year. The US could have two teams entered. This has never happened before (though the host country has only had an automatic berth since 2009).
not two teams
Instead CCL #2 gets the play-in round.
I am not a Supporter | I am not a Fan | I am a Sounder
Sounder At Heart
by Dave Clark on May 3, 2011 10:44 AM PDT via mobile up reply actions

by 
















