Lots of players join Major League Soccer (MLS) from European clubs. ISTR reading somewhere that generally these are men whose best days are behind them.
So if you’re a European player and you get sent to play in the U.S., is that considered a bad thing? Kind of like an American Major League Baseball player going to play in Japan – it’s definitely a sign that their career is struggling.
Or is being sent to play for Kansas City or Chicago seen as just as legitimate a career move as being sent to play for Munich or Milan?
If we are assuming that the player is coming from a top league - EPL, Bundesliga, Serie A, and the like - it’s a significant demotion. The anaology to MLB and Nippon Professional Baseball is a good one; playing for Real Madrid is like playing for the LA Dodgers, and playing for Sporting KC is like playing for the Orix Buffaloes. At best; to be honest MLS is probably further below the Premier League than NPB is below MLB in terms of quality.
Of course, it could be good for a player’s career if they are struggling to stay in that top league, or are mired in a reserve role, and need regular playing time to develop.
MLS has the 16th highest average league salary in the world. It is not even close in pay to the major European leagues. I suspect even if you are one of the top players in MLS, getting well above average, the endorsement possibilities are fewer.
Sure some may have a reason to take much lower pay than their talent would rate. Pay is probably a good proxy, though. Quality players will tend to follow the money. For soccer, the money is **not **in the US.
Yes, it’s a significant demotion. Tends to be older players who may use their last few years to earn a bit more cash before they retire (and generally after they’ve stopped playing for their national team).
Most European imports to the US tend to be as stated, players who are either past their best or those who did not manage to hold down a place in a pro Euro league.
David Beckham is one player who came to MLS while he was still performing at a high level (he was Real Madrid’s player of the year the last two years he had played), but he clearly was on the downward trajectory.
They are not sent. They go voluntarily. And indeed, often because they can earn more, given that their best years are behind them, or because they cannot keep a spot in a European side of reasonable level.
And, I think it was pretty clear that a big part of Beckham’s decision to play in MLS was for the PR, and to increase his own visibility and popularity in the U.S.
I’d say the exception would be a very young, but promising, player who is “loaned” to a team in order to get experience. Usually, the loan is to another European team, but perhaps young American players owned by some of the top teams in Europe might fare better playing closer to home.
Also Beckham was given a very good deal to start a new MLS team which he has in Miami. They started play this month in a temporary stadium in Ft. Lauderdale. MLS failed in Miami in 2001 but I guess they hope Beckham can bring in more crowds even as just an owner.
Foreign players in MLS tend to be in a couple different categories.
1 - Past their prime stars. In the early days of the league this was a lot of severely over the hill players, but more recently it’s been (mostly) guys with some left in their tank, but not able to compete at the highest level. A change of pace before retirement.
2 - Journeymen that couldn’t hack it in the big leagues and would get paid more in MLS than they would bouncing around the Belgian or Danish leagues.
3 - Young South and Central American players. This is more recent, but Atlanta especially have looked to sign attractive talent, play them for a couple years, and then sell on to bigger leagues. Miguel Almiron is the main one, but I imagine Barco and Pity Martinez will also leave eventually.
The most criticism is probably at the people in group 2 that thought they would be playing for Liverpool. If you leave your home country, are in a big club’s 2nd division team, go on loan, bounce around, and then end up in MLS at 27, you’re probably considered a failure. If you’re a 33 year old Thierry Henry/David Villa/David Beckham, then you’re a legend that is adjusting to a new level and/or going on an adventure in a new country. I tend to see MLS get shit for that more than I see those players denigrated for going there.
MLS DC united signed an American kid at 14 and he played 87 games for them. After that he did not really do much, bounced around for the next 10 years. He was born in Ghana.
I think it is pretty much accepted Mrs. Beckham’s desire to expand and develop her new career (which in the event she did very successfully) was probably the driving force behind his decision. The ownership agreement clause was more of a sweetener and an expression of hope. Otherwise at that time it was pretty puzzling why he woud move, he was still worth a place in a top side.
Agreed. Beckham started it. And since then Henry and Villa moved when they still were playing well, Villa right after starting a Champions League final. Villa also has gone the ownership route as well.
It’s the same with American baseball players going to Japan. No one is sending them to Japanese clubs. They go voluntarily. It’s not like being sent to the minor leagues.