The MLS

[Bill Paisley]

Evening people, firstly apologies if this is in the wrong section!

The MLS is something i've been interested in trying for a while, I took some tentative steps on one of the older versions, but the myriad of rules and regulations mostly put me off.

However i'm at the stage where i'm looking for a new challenge and i'd like to re-visit this league.

I'm just wondering if there's anywhere on these forums that has a guide to the MLS or something along those lines regarding making it easier to understand?

Thanks in advance.

[kieronbrown73]

I also attempted once on FM07 but got so confused by the draft system that I gave up, so I too would welcome a guide on the League.

[looknohands]

Aljarov's the one to talk to. His site http://z6.invisionfree.com/fmnortham...ex.php?act=idx is for North American players, so if you have any questions about the league you can ask there, or shoot me an email and I'll try and answer any question you might have.

[edgar555]

You can also have a look in here http://community.sigames.com/showthr...79#post4399879

[The Sean]

I, too, am an MLSer. Ask away, my friend.

[baker.simon]

I, too, am an MLSer. Ask away, my friend.

Ok, when are the MLS going to do away with the silly rules and adopt a traditonal footballing setup such as, a full transfer system with no drafts, and adopting FIFA dates so teams wont be missing international players for their league games?

[The Sean]

Ok, when are the MLS going to do away with the silly rules and adopt a traditonal footballing setup such as, a full transfer system with no drafts, and adopting FIFA dates so teams wont be missing international players for their league games?

I can only laugh when I read this because it has been a hot debate among soccer fans over here for years. A month or two ago, we had an intense debate on this forum about the pros and cons of the features of MLS you have mentioned here. Search for it and you will be entertained. In short, I have heard of no plans to do any of the things you have asked for.

[baker.simon]

I can only laugh when I read this because it has been a hot debate among soccer fans over here for years. A month or two ago, we had an intense debate on this forum about the pros and cons of the features of MLS you have mentioned here. Search for it and you will be entertained. In short, I have heard of no plans to do any of the things you have asked for.

And you should adopt football as the term rather than soccer. Use soccer for that thing that is like Rugby and save football for the game that is played mostly with feet

[tdpats12]

Ok, when are the MLS going to do away with the silly rules and adopt a traditonal footballing setup such as, a full transfer system with no drafts, and adopting FIFA dates so teams wont be missing international players for their league games?

* Full transfer system won't happen. Look up something called the NASL as to why. A primary goal of the MLS (and most North American sports leagues) is a concept called parity. The idea that every team has an equal chance, financially, to win a championship helps establish fanbases and keeps more teams in the black. Even leagues like Major League Baseball, which don't feature a salary cap, have "balancing" features like the draft and revenue sharing. The reason parity is especially important for MLS is that without history (the league being ~15 years old) if a team is terrible year in and year out people will stop buying tickets and it will fold.

* The draft exists in all American sports, the reason being the system of "academies" and "youth teams" is completely and utterly foreign to us. The idea that a "kid" could leave his studies to go play sports is often met with derision in American media. Therefore, the "academy" for American athletes is high school and college. Without team-specific academies and again to serve the concept of parity (worst teams get higher picks) the draft exists to distribute talent from the academy/college level to the professional ranks. This, I admit, is an understandably completely foreign concept to many non-Americans, but in the United States college athletics is very important, popular, and financially successful thing. There are exceptions (NY Red Bulls have an academy, and Major League Baseball drafts high schoolers 18+ to play in the minor leagues, which are effectively U-21s and reserves for comparison's sake) but that is generally the rule.

* Schedule changes are also unlikely due to weather concerns. But I know less about this than the other stuff.

* In any event, how the players are acquired is ultimately irrelevant in the grand scheme. MLS will do what is best for it to operate in the United States with American fans, annoyances of European fans and FM 2010 players aren't related to the goal of building a domestic league from scratch in a nation that doesn't really care about soccer. What does matter, and it wasn't always this way, that MLS follows the same rules as the rest of the world ON THE FIELD (we say field, not pitch, another eccentricity).

My tips for managing in MLS? Treat your draft picks as resources. You can use them to draft talent, but given the lack of advance scouting (something that is huge in all American drafts) they are more of a crap-shoot than they are in real life. So I often trade them to other teams for their players - usually American ones because I buy Internationals. The draft is there for if you want it, but most FM managers will be successful enough in the league that the picks will be low and therefore not as valuable. Play normally as you would in any league with a international player restriction and a wage restriction (just because it's called a cap doesn't mean it works that much different than a budget your owner insists upon, except for the fact that it's more or less a hard cap, developmental and designated players excepted). The league itself works fairly similarly to most Cup competitions (group play + elimination tournament). The rest is the same.

And you should adopt football as the term rather than soccer. Use soccer for that thing that is like Rugby and save football for the game that is played mostly with feet

Not this again.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Names_f...ation_football

The "foot" part refers not to which body part usually makes contact with the ball, but the fact the athlete isn't on a horse but instead on foot.

[HarryMills]

The main issue I found when playing the MLS was that the standard of players in the draft was really poor, it sort of ruined the excitement of having first pick tbh, I was hoping to find a soccer Lebron or Kobe

[tdpats12]

The main issue I found when playing the MLS was that the standard of players in the draft was really poor, it sort of ruined the excitement of having first pick tbh, I was hoping to find a soccer Lebron or Kobe

Using FMScout I've seen a couple very solid players (140-160 PA) but no-one amazing. Great for MLS though if you are in it for the long haul, but as I put in my previous post I usually trade my picks because:

* Talent in the draft isn't awe-inspiring
* I'm going to be good enough that my picks will be fairly low and therefore less valuable
* The lack of advance scouting (I really ought to know who is going to be in a draft during the PREVIOUS transfer window, so I can plan ahead: "I'm going to need those picks, look at Bob Jones, that guy is gonna be a stud!" or "This draft is awful, I'm gonna get rid of these picks.") is crippling to the entire system of a draft. There are websites all over the internet predicting the NFL draft years in advance for this reason. Well, that and we watch college football as much as professional football, so we've been watching a lot of the league's prospects play big minutes for at least three years, so we're invested in predicting their future moreso than someone who exists to us only as a name peddled by a scout and occasionally featured on Youtube.

[fdawsoniv]

Football vs. soccer, lift vs. elevator, flashlight vs. torch-they're just cultural things and really not worth all the bickering.

I was going to discuss some of the reasons for the MLS rules and how they fit American culture, but tdpats12 did a better job than I ever could. I think the bigger issues in progressing the American soccer system are media attention (slowly increasing) and having more young stars to choose the sport over traditional American games (which will come as the MLS grows and the media attention increases). If the MLS grows more stable, they may change their setup somewhat, but as pats said, many of their "quirks" are standard for American professional sport so don't expect them to change too much.

[noah08]

FUNNIEST THREAD EVER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I live in america and there is NOTHING normal in the MLS. People wonder when they're going to be more like the Premier league and such, but it's going to be a very long time for many numerous reasons. So many that I don't know about it's insane.

We all know basketball and american football is huge, and to me they look at themselves as a business. Primetime draft shows, analysis, etc. Most americans look at soccer (don't get me started on this)as girly and unmanly, and so for the MLS to get ANY recognition they need to bring in cheerleaders, and drafts, and mascots, and halftime shows, and you get the point...

Also had a league before the MLS(forget name) that folded and they had to get another league up and running, and to try and cut down on that, and to make sure the league doesn't fold, they put in the salary rule. Basically so no one team gets all of the (retrospec little money in MLS) and every other team fold because they suck it up day in day out. I think the MLS was trying to make the league more fair than Premier league or Serie A because every team gets a chance with oney and it's not just the team with the most money that win. Sorry ManU, I love you, but have to rat you out lol

Again, there are thousands of reasons that I can't even explain (and in some ways understand)

tdpats12(sorry, I'm no Tom Brady/Pats fan) explains things better than I do and brings up different points however

[noah08]

Football vs. soccer, lift vs. elevator, flashlight vs. torch-they're just cultural things and really not worth all the bickering.

I was going to discuss some of the reasons for the MLS rules and how they fit American culture, but tdpats12 did a better job than I ever could. I think the bigger issues in progressing the American soccer system are media attention (slowly increasing) and having more young stars to choose the sport over traditional American games (which will come as the MLS grows and the media attention increases). If the MLS grows more stable, they may change their setup somewhat, but as pats said, many of their "quirks" are standard for American professional sport so don't expect them to change too much.

sorry for double post...

just wanted to agree with fdawsoniv that the media is very slowly, going up. the Beckham experiment may not have worked out but sure got a lot of coverage, even if not exactly the stuff MLS wanted

[noah08]

And you should adopt football as the term rather than soccer. Use soccer for that thing that is like Rugby and save football for the game that is played mostly with feet

Sorry to rock your boat, but I doubt that most Americans know what Rugby is

Crazy huh... I think Rugby is more manly with no padding than american football with 40lbs. of padding

[ArranoBeltza]

Sorry to rock your boat, but I doubt that most Americans know what Rugby is

Crazy huh... I think Rugby is more manly with no padding than american football with 40lbs. of padding

It's funny, because I played "foot"ball and with all that padding, it rarely hurts at all. Even if it does, you'll get enough breaks to shake it off.

[Agbonlahor4England]

It's not The MLS, it's just MLS. MLS stands for Major League Soccer, so you wouldn't say 'The Major League Soccer would you? </pet peeve>
MLS is built on slow growth so some of the well, different rules, are a bit odd for the European fan. It's a difficult league to understand and an increadibly difficult league to model accurately in the game. It's based on the parity model which is the antethesis of the European model (so that while every MLS team has aproximately the same wage budget and transfer funds, thats not true of any other league around the world). And while the MLS is thriving now in new markets (Seattle and Toronto are arguably the most successful teams in terms of fan support) it wasn't long ago that the league was in crisis and it's biggest drawing card was Fredy Adu. So while soccer/football has come a long way in America and will continue to grow the rules will be a little quaint, trust me we're all as frustrated about them as you are . But, hey, it's North America, we have to do things a little different, don't we?

[tdpats12]

It's kind of Beckham, but it's more ESPN.

ESPN is the gatekeeper of American sports. It's a shame that the EPL rights are owned by Fox Soccer - a premium channel even I can't justify spending money on despite the fact I do enjoy soccer/football and follow Arsenal when I can - because ESPN is part of the basic cable package in every market. They had the rights to the Champions League and they got fair - for our soccer standards - ratings when they are aired. Plus, when they actually bought some real English announcers and not barely-know-the-game American announcers (the 2006 World Cup announcers were pretty awful over here, and I like Dave O'Brien - met him at the Maui Invitational - but he doesn't really know soccer - it's like he's reading from poorly-researched cue cards) for the games they did air, the quality of their broadcasts increased dramatically.

If ESPN really focuses on and is successful at selling soccer to Americans... well, maybe more people here would follow it and take it seriously.

*ESPN has partial EPL rights to some medicore games, that air at noon England time. So... yeah.

[tdpats12]

Sorry to rock your boat, but I doubt that most Americans know what Rugby is

Crazy huh... I think Rugby is more manly with no padding than american football with 40lbs. of padding

Actually, the padding was added because the sport would have been banned decades ago for being too dangerous. Theodore Roosevelt was especially appalled at all the young men who lost their lives playing a sport. Padding, the line of scrimmage, the forward pass - all initially introduced to prevent on-field deaths.

Ironically, it is thought that helmets are actually increasing the number of concussions suffered by players at all levels of American football, and it's becoming a serious problem. People who don't understand American football look at pads simply as protection, those of us who have played the game realize what they really are: A weapon. Leading with your helmet hurts. A lot.

But that's getting off topic.

[scalascione]

Sorry to rock your boat, but I doubt that most Americans know what Rugby is

Crazy huh... I think Rugby is more manly with no padding than american football with 40lbs. of padding

I'm right there with you. As an American, I can barely follow American sports, short of college basketball. Actually went to go see a rugby match in Washington, DC.

[scalascione]

It's not The MLS, it's just MLS. MLS stands for Major League Soccer, so you wouldn't say 'The Major League Soccer would you? </pet peeve>
MLS is built on slow growth so some of the well, different rules, are a bit odd for the European fan. It's a difficult league to understand and an increadibly difficult league to model accurately in the game. It's based on the parity model which is the antethesis of the European model (so that while every MLS team has aproximately the same wage budget and transfer funds, thats not true of any other league around the world). And while the MLS is thriving now in new markets (Seattle and Toronto are arguably the most successful teams in terms of fan support) it wasn't long ago that the league was in crisis and it's biggest drawing card was Fredy Adu. So while soccer/football has come a long way in America and will continue to grow the rules will be a little quaint, trust me we're all as frustrated about them as you are . But, hey, it's North America, we have to do things a little different, don't we?

Of course we do. Instead of metre, its yard. Soccer instead of football. MPH instead KmPH. As an American, I must ask, WTF North America?

[lovingthegreen]

I just used the new editor to create MLS how I like it - single table, no playoffs (other than the U.S. Cup) and got rid of the drafts. In other words, made it more European. A regular season that actually means something (i.e. determines the league's champion over 30+ games, not over four). Normal transfer system. Or course I do not see this happening in real life anytime soon, but that is why I created that setup in my game.

By the way, one of the best things MLS ever did was to, as somebody mentioned above, make it just like the rest of the world on the field. No stupid penalty shutouts during regular-season games, etc. I can live with the off-the-field rules I don't agree with as long as I can head over to the stadium and still see games played with the same field rules as England, etc. That is one of the reasons I cannot stand American college soccer - partly because of the clock counting down and stopping all the time, but mostly because there are subs every five minutes. Completely ruins the flow of the game for me.

[Bill Paisley]

Thanks for all the replies it's quite an interesting subject really and nice for a change from the usual.

I'm pretty sure this model would never work in England, simply because the modern day European player has far too much power. I could never see someone like Wayne Rooney playing for Burnley, simply because from his point of view they wouldn't have the salary, stadium or sporting ambition he was looking for, and the player pretty much rules.
It's obviously a lot different in America so fair play to them for trying, but this to me means the league will never get to a really high standard with so many changes year on year.
Continuity and keeping hold of your best players are two vital ingredients in a successful team, in England at least.

As for teams folding because the fans get disillusioned, look at Newcastle United. Haven't won a thing for 30 years yet they get a gate of 55,000 people every other week. I'm aware that "Soccer" is competing against other more traditional American sports, so again kudos for trying to get something fair and fan-friendly.

Anyway I started a game with New York last night, and managed to get through pre-season without too much trouble.

The effect of the draft was negligible for me, I'd managed to get most of my first team squad sorted out before it, and because I had like 14th pick most of the decent players had gone. Mind you Edson Buddle was the best pick so I haven't missed much I don't think lol.

However I also managed to pick up Ronald Cerritos which the fans were very happy with. I'm off to study the guide so thanks for that.

[tdpats12]

Ah that was the Waiver Draft, where players who were cut by their original teams could be re-distributed to other league teams. If they failed to get drafted or "clear waivers" another way, they become "free agents" or in more common football terminology they are "released on a free" from the league. The amateur draft occurs after the season, you will be informed of who is participating in the draft (at this point you will want to scout them) and which new crop of players is being labeled Generation Adidas - particularly promising players whose Senior contracts do not apply against the cap.

Re: Newcastle doing poorly and still getting fans in the stands. A simple Wiki search (I'm American, details like this are not on the top of my head!) reveals that they were founded in 1892, and had at least some semblance of success. You really can't compare the tradition and team loyalty of a European team to an MLS outfit that has barely been on anyone's radar for the last decade or so. Other American sports have just as much history as those teams, namely baseball teams like the Cincinatti Reds that have been in existence since the late 19th century, and will continue to draw supporters even during the bad times, but they have tradition too. A better example might be the Red Sox. The Boston Red Sox, until 2004, hadn't won a World Series since 1918 and still had the most sellouts for years before it. The Chicago Cubs haven't won since 1908, and to this day have some of the best and most dedicated fans in Major League Baseball.

MLS as such does not have that kind of loyalty. A time may come when it does, and they can think about a more open transfer system. I do think as far as MLS is concerned promotion and relegation is likely out - because of the franchise system and sheer geography (the US is a pretty huge place, and teams are spread out all over it). That being said, I would love to see promotion/relegation in college athletics. They have built-in fanbases (students), their athletes are more or less free (scholarship), and it would make bottom-tier conference games far more exciting. For anyone American reading the thread, I mean that - for example - the Big Ten and MAC could be linked together, with the losers of the Big Ten being relegated and the winners of the MAC being promoted. Could be done for PAC-10 and the WAC, or the Big 12 and the MWC... etc.

[Bill Paisley]

tdpats very well put I agree it wasn't a good comparison, and you're right it will take a long time to get to a comparable level of loyalty. I say loyalty it's more like a religion with the "Toon" fans the whole city seems to revolve around the football team.

I would imagine it's probably similar with certain baseball fans, as with any sport that has been around for that length of time.

Any reason you chose to follow Arsenal when picking a team?

Also a question regarding the Generation Adidas players if you or someone else doesn't mind, the one I had was terrible so he was waived (see i'm learning already).

Is there a pool of these players I can pick from? I know next to nothing about them so any info re contracts availability would be great.

[looknohands]

The main issue I found when playing the MLS was that the standard of players in the draft was really poor, it sort of ruined the excitement of having first pick tbh, I was hoping to find a soccer Lebron or Kobe

This has been a big issue for a few years now, but Aljarov has let SI know about the problem and it is hopefully being addressed. I did some quick research on the matter on the fmnorthamerica site to highlight the problem. However, using a program like FMRTE is a simple (if time-consuming) process that can fix this issue. Just be realistic (no 200 CA/PA players) about talent levels (a quick glance at the db in the editor should give you an idea to what level MLS players are typically at) and you can make the draft meaningful.

[looknohands]

tdpats very well put I agree it wasn't a good comparison, and you're right it will take a long time to get to a comparable level of loyalty. I say loyalty it's more like a religion with the "Toon" fans the whole city seems to revolve around the football team.

I would imagine it's probably similar with certain baseball fans, as with any sport that has been around for that length of time.

Any reason you chose to follow Arsenal when picking a team?

Also a question regarding the Generation Adidas players if you or someone else doesn't mind, the one I had was terrible so he was waived (see i'm learning already).

Is there a pool of these players I can pick from? I know next to nothing about them so any info re contracts availability would be great.

Each year for the amateur draft, the computer will select 15 players as Generation Adidas players. In real life, these players are either 1. the best players currently, or 2. younger players with high upsides. These players are allowed to sign for more money than a typical development contract (not even $30,000 a year) but don't count against the cap. As I mentioned in the previous post, this scenario doesn't quite play out in FM 2010. I've seen GA players that were 23 years old with a CA/PA of 85/93...they'd never see the light of day in MLS. Again, using FMRTE can patch this issue, as I make sure the GA players (all players available for the draft are announced towards the end of December in-game) are either capable of starting right away (CA of at least 100) or have good PAs (135+). With 15 GA players, each team should theoretically have a chance to draft a quality player each year, assuming you or the computer hasn't traded away your picks.

[looknohands]

Thanks for all the replies it's quite an interesting subject really and nice for a change from the usual.

I'm pretty sure this model would never work in England, simply because the modern day European player has far too much power.

Well, the commisioner of MLS recently went before some European clubs and informed them of how the league operates on a salary cap; the economic downturn has spooked many owners and they're now looking for some reassurance that they won't lose everything (particularly in the second division on down). And I believe it was UEFA that has pushed for the salary restrictions tied to revenue as a way of limiting big spenders hogging all of the talent, so it certainly looks as though there are some aspects of our wacky little league that others find appealing. Until MLS owners prove that they can restrain themselves financially I doubt we'll see the day of an open transfer system in MLS...

[tdpats12]

Any reason you chose to follow Arsenal when picking a team?

* Big enough profile that I could expect them to be on TV here fairly often.
* Young player I could follow that was signed to a long contract (Fabregas).
* Entertaining style of football.
* Uniforms/kits that didn't make me gag.
* Press I can follow easily - ie, same language.

I didn't really consider teams abroad because they had Americans on them - at the time I was picking Clint Dempsey was still playing in the MLS, Brian McBride's age meant he wasn't going to be at Fulham much longer, and I didn't yet appreciate the skills of Tim Howard (Kasey Keller was the US #1 keeper) or Marcus Hahnemann. I really only got into the sport after watching the 2006 World Cup in HD. Before that the only game I had ever watched in its entirety was the 1999 Women's World Cup final, so that should tell you something about Americans and soccer.

Neither I nor my family has any history following soccer/football, so I didn't really feel bad jumping on the fanbase of a popular team and casually following it. I suppose if I follow an MLS team it would be the Revs, as they are owned by the same man who owns the New England Patriots (American football and the inspiration for my login). If I was living in England I might have picked the local team, regardless of its reputation of status.

[fdawsoniv]

You know, I once drew up a system just like you described for college football, pats, with the Big Ten and MAC linked, etc. Strange.

I don't like to agree this much with a Patriots fan. Surely there's something we can disagree on.

[stevedaytona]

It's kind of Beckham, but it's more ESPN.

ESPN is the gatekeeper of American sports. It's a shame that the EPL rights are owned by Fox Soccer - a premium channel even I can't justify spending money on despite the fact I do enjoy soccer/football and follow Arsenal when I can - because ESPN is part of the basic cable package in every market. They had the rights to the Champions League and they got fair - for our soccer standards - ratings when they are aired. Plus, when they actually bought some real English announcers and not barely-know-the-game American announcers (the 2006 World Cup announcers were pretty awful over here, and I like Dave O'Brien - met him at the Maui Invitational - but he doesn't really know soccer - it's like he's reading from poorly-researched cue cards) for the games they did air, the quality of their broadcasts increased dramatically.

If ESPN really focuses on and is successful at selling soccer to Americans... well, maybe more people here would follow it and take it seriously.

*ESPN has partial EPL rights to some medicore games, that air at noon England time. So... yeah.

Interesting discussion here. I have lived in the US the last 7 years but am British.

I agree ESPN has improved of late in it's coverage - I don't know that I would describe their EPL games as mediocre but that is probably because I am a Burnley fan and it's been great finally seeing their games in HD! I do get Fox Soccer as well (for me it is just part of the digital cable package and is not a 'premium' channel). Looking forward to next year when Fox Soccer is also going to start broadcasting in HD.

As regards MLS I just can't get any enthusiasm up for it - maybe because there is no team anywhere near me (Florida)?

I'm sure it does seem a weird system to non-Americans. As tdpats12 (Go Pats!) said parity is important in most American sports and MLS is probably right to try to achieve that. You cannot underestimate the power of the NCAA (collegiate sports) and that is the main reason why we have drafts over here. Nice idea about promotion & relegation but never going to happen in my opinion. They cannot even agree to a playoff system for Football (American) and instead rely a mix of press voting and computer programming to determine who competes for the National Championship. Someone somewhere needs to knock the heads of the various conferences together and come up with something for the good of the game. But I digress....lol

Maybe I'll start an MLS save while I wait for the 10.2 patch

[The Sean]

Someone mentioned the penaltfy shootout rule to settle regular season matches that ended in a draw; MLS has not done this for years. Games end in a draw all the time.

[tdpats12]

Someone mentioned the penaltfy shootout rule to settle regular season matches that ended in a draw; MLS has not done this for years. Games end in a draw all the time.

If there was anything good about that it was the way it was done. Far more interesting than a spot kick.

[The Sean]

If there was anything good about that it was the way PKs were done. Far more interesting than a spot kick.

It was fun to watch. Old tradition from the NASL, if I remember...

[Almondo]

tdpats12 has actually explained MLS so that we can all understand it. Also it's good to see a fellow Pats fan around here

[gunner86]

So how does it work when clubs sign players from overseas, eg Beckham, Ljungberg etc.?

[tdpats12]

So how does it work when clubs sign players from overseas, eg Beckham, Ljungberg etc.?

Just like any other with one key difference:

Players are owned by the league as a whole, even Designated Players like Beckham. But I'll get to those in a second.

When a player joins an MLS team, they effectively join MLS league itself. The teams are franchises owned by the league. This is why the waiver system exists. Here's an example:

*I sign a player from Brazil for a $200k transfer fee. I negotiate a 200k per year (I always change to per year from per week) contract with the player and he joins my team. That 200k contract is effectively owned by MLS and the player is allocated to my team.

*If he plays like rubbish, or I have new priorities, or need to free up an international slot, I waive him. When a player is waived, the team in question is surrendering their rights to him, but the league still owns his contract. Every other team in the league then has an opportunity then to acquire the player for his current contract. If no other MLS team wants him (or his contract) only then is he released on a free transfer and his contract void.

*If he plays well enough to generate interest from foreign clubs I may decide to sell him for a profit if he has plenty of time left on his contract. I negotiate a transfer fee and he is sold. The team who owned his rights receive the majority of the transfer fee, 33% is shared with MLS (and in real life, that means the league as a whole).

*If he plays well enough to generate interest from foreign clubs, but is nearing the end of his contract, he can negotiate to leave the team AND the league at large at the end of the deal.

*If he is a designated player, then a portion of his salary counts against the salary cap and that happens to be the part of the contract that is owned by the league. Anything beyond that is the owner's prerogative to pay. Here's a more detailed explanation.

Domestic transfers can be accomplished using money (allocation funds), draft picks, international or designated player slots, or other players. Player trades are the most common method of transaction in American sports, for what it's worth. The idea of selling a player for cash is relatively foreign to us. When Japanese pitcher Daisuke Matsuzaka was negotiating with Major League Baseball teams to join the league, a similar system to common European football transfers was used. The exception being that the transfer was accomplished via a secret auction with the winner getting exclusive rights to negotiate with Matsuzaka. The Red Sox paid $51.1 million and won the rights. The American sports media was incredulous. That's just an example and a rare one, more often cash is included as part of a player exchange and the primary parts of trade packages are almost always other players (or draft picks).

[looknohands]

And don't forget that it's incredibly rare for MLS to actually pay for a player- I believe Fredy Montero was purchased this year because his Colombian team was having financial difficulties.

[tdpats12]

Yeah, if you want to play more realistically you'd be looking for free transfers. Plus, your transfer budget is usually limited.

[The Sean]

Super explanation of acquiring players!

For the record, I thoroughly enjoy MLS and its oddities. We still play on fields (pitches) that meet regulation sizes, we still use a size 5 ball, we still play with 11 men-per-side, we still have all the other normalities common in leagues throughout the world. I truthfully don't understand why everyone bashes the American system but freely accepts the oddities of Hyundai A-League or other such leagues around the world.

[gunner86]

Thank you for that tdpats, I've never really understood the little ideosynchrosies of the MLS system and this thread has been very helpful. I'm actually quite tempted to try a save in the MLS now, tried it on 08, but got very confused very quickly and just gave up. I had not discovered the joys of the forum then though. Thanks again guys.

[noah08]

It's kind of Beckham, but it's more ESPN.

ESPN is the gatekeeper of American sports. It's a shame that the EPL rights are owned by Fox Soccer - a premium channel even I can't justify spending money on despite the fact I do enjoy soccer/football and follow Arsenal when I can - because ESPN is part of the basic cable package in every market. They had the rights to the Champions League and they got fair - for our soccer standards - ratings when they are aired. Plus, when they actually bought some real English announcers and not barely-know-the-game American announcers (the 2006 World Cup announcers were pretty awful over here, and I like Dave O'Brien - met him at the Maui Invitational - but he doesn't really know soccer - it's like he's reading from poorly-researched cue cards) for the games they did air, the quality of their broadcasts increased dramatically.

If ESPN really focuses on and is successful at selling soccer to Americans... well, maybe more people here would follow it and take it seriously.

*ESPN has partial EPL rights to some medicore games, that air at noon England time. So... yeah.

Yea espn is huge. fox soccer channel comes with my cable package(thank god!!)

I enjoyed the old shootout if it would have been for playoffs not every game.

I think the next step for MLS is to try to get more attention than other sports not basketball, NFL, but say hockey, because right now even hockey is getting more coverage on ESPN than the "worlds game". Don't ask me how though

I learned so much from this forum!

[looknohands]

Because there's quite a few people north of the border that help make hockey an incredibly lucrative sport. Attendance-wise we're a little bit behind the NHL and NBA averages, but we're nowhere near their level of television revenue. Still, considering that it wasn't too long ago that the league was having to pay to have its games televised we've come a long way...

[capt. cRaZy]

As far as managing in the game goes, I think the MLS is one of the toughest leagues to win year in and year out.

[Jason the Yank]

Also had a league before the MLS(forget name) that folded and they had to get another league up and running, and to try and cut down on that, and to make sure the league doesn't fold, they put in the salary rule. Basically so no one team gets all of the (retrospec little money in MLS) and every other team fold because they suck it up day in day out. I think the MLS was trying to make the league more fair than Premier league or Serie A because every team gets a chance with oney and it's not just the team with the most money that win. Sorry ManU, I love you, but have to rat you out lol

There's a number of leagues that have come and gone before.

The NASL was the league of the '70s that got players like Pele, Beckenbauer, Best, Carlos Alberto, etc. Everyone ended up spending money they didn't have trying to keep up with the Cosmos and it brought the whole thing down.

There have been 3 leagues called the American Soccer League. The one in the 1920s was strong enough to draw some pretty good players away from the British league. But that collapsed in the Depression.

Go here for everything you'd like to know about the history of American soccer.

[Bill Paisley]

That's for the link i've just spent the last hour or so reading some of the articles on the list, very interesting stuff. The Memphis Rogues story was fascinating.

Also, I had no idea there were so many teams around in America in the late 19th century, a lot of these seem to have been set up before other much more popular sports took hold such as American Football.

At the risk of sounding cheesy, I know how Football can be described as a kind of global language, I just never knew America had such a strong dialect.

[gunner86]

At the risk of sounding cheesy, I know how Football can be described as a kind of global language, I just never knew America had such a strong dialect.

You are correct - that was cheesy... But sometimes cheesy is what the world needs (I realise THAT was cheesy as well.)

[Ellis_D]

Not this again.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Names_f...ation_football

The "foot" part refers not to which body part usually makes contact with the ball, but the fact the athlete isn't on a horse but instead on foot.

'North America'

'In the United States, American football is the most dominant code of football in the country and the word football in the U.S. is used to refer to that sport. Association football is referred to as soccer.

The sport's governing body is the United States Soccer Federation; however it was originally called the U.S. Football Association, and was formed in 1913 by the merger of the American Football Association and the American Amateur Football Association. The word "soccer" was added to the name in 1945, making it the U.S. Soccer Football Association, and it did not drop the word "football" until 1974, when it assumed its current name.'



So the above taken from the link you posted shows that Americans used to call football by it's correct name, and since then you have decided to call it 'soccer'! Crazy thing, quite cheeky really aswell. I'm sure you wouldn't like it if we started calling baseball 'rounders', or basketball 'netball'!

On a side note - your 'football' is just rugby for wimps! All them big shoulder pads, helmets, etc!

[tdpats12]

"Correct" assumes a lot. There's rather a bit of jingoism and superiority in that statement. Care to revise? I suppose you'd defend "aluminium" over "aluminum" with just as much pride and enthusiasm?

Regarding American football, such statements - rugby for wimps - can only be stated by someone who has never played the game. Rugby is a tough, brutal game and I have no problem saying so. The pads in American football are, by their nature, intended for protection. But players know and exploit the fact that pads are also weapons. American football is a typical target for fans of soccer because the sports emphasize dramatically different skill sets. In American football it's about power, sprinting, and explosion - giving 100% effort for a few seconds against other athletes quite capable of doing the same - with coaches matching the very best of their wit on each play. Soccer has elements of this yes, but it's also about consistency and stamina, so fans of soccer tend to view football players as unathletic (couldn't be further from the truth, unless marathon runners are considered better athletes than sprinters) and fans of American football tend to regard soccer as slow (also couldn't be further from the truth and I don't need to explain why to a forum populated by such fans).

I probly took your comment too seriously, but you'll forgive me if I get somewhat defensive in this setting. I defend soccer with equal enthusiasm on boards focused on American football.

(Note that Americans often view soccer as a sport for girls and children here, until I link them to some horrific shin injury and they change their mind. It all comes down to ignorance, really.)

[Ellis_D]

"Correct" assumes a lot. There's rather a bit of jingoism and superiority in that statement. Care to revise? I suppose you'd defend "aluminium" over "aluminum" with just as much pride and enthusiasm?

Regarding American football, such statements - rugby for wimps - can only be stated by someone who has never played the game. Rugby is a tough, brutal game and I have no problem saying so. The pads in American football are, by their nature, intended for protection. But players know and exploit the fact that pads are also weapons. American football is a typical target for fans of soccer because the sports emphasize dramatically different skill sets. In American football it's about power, sprinting, and explosion - giving 100% effort for a few seconds against other athletes quite capable of doing the same - with coaches matching the very best of their wit on each play. Soccer has elements of this yes, but it's also about consistency and stamina, so fans of soccer tend to view football players as unathletic (couldn't be further from the truth, unless marathon runners are considered better athletes than sprinters) and fans of American football tend to regard soccer as slow (also couldn't be further from the truth and I don't need to explain why to a forum populated by such fans).

I probly took your comment too seriously, but you'll forgive me if I get somewhat defensive in this setting. I defend soccer with equal enthusiasm on boards focused on American football.

(Note that Americans often view soccer as a sport for girls and children here, until I link them to some horrific shin injury and they change their mind. It all comes down to ignorance, really.)

Lol, all said tongue-in-cheek mate, I was just messing about!

Over here, football certainly isn't for girls, and we view women who play it as a bit manly or boyish! Children do love it though too.

We have a lot of rugby fans who say football is for wimps, and I understand the point in comparision to rugby. Just as I would if an American said their 'football' is a lot more manly than 'our football'.

As for taking my comment too seriously, yes I was joking, but I understand anyone defending their country/sport as vociferously in that situation, but I was just playing, using the phrases people over here often do.