When the MLS allstars lose its because the MLS can't compete. When they win it's because the other team sucked.
HA! You beat me to it.
Do you honestly think LA Galaxy could play on the same pitch as Bayern Munchen?
Look at how badly the MLS teams do in the crappy champions league over here, where its basically teams from Mexico vs teams from MLS. If you can't win the, what is it called, concacaf champions league? You can't compete with the best teams in Europe, and typically, the Bundesliga is producing one or two of the top 15 teams in the whole of Europe.
Also, does any other league have an "all star" team that plays off season powerhouse teams? The mls was designed to be like all other american sports, and that is one of its biggest hurdles. Having a playoff system, while entertaining, i don't think is the best thing for the league. There's just too much in the way for them to keep up with leagues that have been playing in the hotbeds of football for hundreds of years.
sorry so long
Okay, here's the deal: the CONCACAF Champions League is a different beast then UEFA.... Honduran/Mexican/Columbian/etc. atmospheres are brutal and unlike anything in UEFA, and players who come over from Europe can attest to that. CONCACAF clubs outside of US and Canada have a severe home-field advantage.
Not only that but the CCL has only recently been given a lot of attention by the domestic league. It used to be just something that got in the way of the regular season because schedule is different for MLS than any other league in the world. But now MLS clubs have 30 man rosters to increase their depth to be able to compete in said tournament.
And as far as playoffs go... I'd much rather have playoffs in which somebody can rise from 10th seed to win it instead of a small handful (read: four) of clubs in EPL winning it every single friggin time. Seriously, what's so exciting about a club clinching the league championship weeks before the season is over? Great, that just rendered the remaining matches null-and-void, save the relegation battle.
Sorry Reno, but you are deluded. Not to say it won;t happen one day, but not yet by a long way.
Sorry, just call 'em like I see 'em
Also, here are some things MLS clubs have to deal with that no other league in the world has to:
- Ridiculously massive travel distances. In 2010 Seattle traveled 49,500 miles for MLS matches only, not including CCL or US Open Cup. In 2011, Vancouver
topped it with 52,000 miles. Other leagues in tiny countries have a fraction of a fraction of the travel distance.
-
PARITY! I honestly can't put enough emphasis on that first word. That might be what sets us apart the most from the rest of the world. MLS wanted to make sure it survived in its early years, and as such they instituted a salary cap to keep things as level and competitive as possible. Granted, there are new loopholes like the Designated Player Rule.... but still, if MLS can keep up with and even beat European clubs who can spend ungodly amounts of money to get players, then I'd say that's another point in the favor of MLS. And along with parity comes the single-entity ownership of the league and thus the Allocation process, which levels things out even more.
- Scheduling. MLS runs March-November (including playoffs) as opposed to the major Euro leagues. Because of this, MLS clubs have to deal with CCL, US Open Cup, players missing due to international duty, and friendlies from off-season Euro clubs, all right smack in the middle of their regular season. And while the Eurosnobs clamor for MLS to match up their scheduling with Europe, it's quite obvious to actual American soccer fans that playing a match in December/January/February in Toronto, Montreal, New York, etc., is 100% out of the question. We don't get the warm current from the Gulf of Mexico like Europe does, essentially preventing western Europe from being a solid block of ice in winter.