Adam Spangler at This Is American Soccer recently ran a fascinating interview with Peppe Pinton, the man who (supposedly) owns the rights to the name "Cosmos". Included in the interview, in which it's clear Pinton was trying to make himself out to be a sympathetic figure by the way, was a discussion about reviving the Cosmos name in Major League Soccer.

It's a interesting idea, and one that has been floating around since the league started way back in 1996. Pinton is adamant that he has offered the name to several entities over the last few years, though he admits that he didn't view 1996 as "the right time" when the league was starting and naming the New York franchise "Cosmos" made sense.

I'm going to break one of the cardinal rules of the internet and suggest you leave my site if you haven't read the interview. Go and read it now before you continue here. I'll wait.

Now, Pinton's clearly a weird guy, and it's very difficult to take his statements to Adam at face value. The Cosmos documentary "Once In A Lifetime" certainly didn't portray him in a positive light, so perhaps we can discount much of what he said to TIAS; including his claims that he's not looking to profit from a sale of the Cosmos name.

But that's not why I'm here. Adam's piece stands on its own as a snapshot of who Peppe Pinton is or is not.

I have a different question in mind, one that goes to a larger issue.

Would MLS truly benefit from the revival of the Cosmos name?

Initially and without much thought, I'm tempted to say "yes". The Cosmos name is the closest thing to a true worldwide brand that American soccer has, and the revival of the name would bring immediate international attention. It might even help draw in some Americans who either gave up on the game when the NASL folded, or transferred their passion to Europe (or South America) and didn't come back when MLS came into being.

But I think it may be just a little more complicated than that. The shadow of the NASL is long and dark, and MLS has yet to truly separate itself from it. Bringing back the Cosmos could a be marketing coup, or it could be the first (or next if you're already concerned about the league's health) step down a path that would only serve to hasten the end of yet another professional soccer league in the United States. Does bringing back the Cosmos name necessarily mean that the league will forget its core discipline? Of course not, but it could be the beginning of a new approach (bringing back the Cosmos is pointless if the team is made up of run-of-the-mill American talent with fringe foreign players sprinkled in) dictated by the need to live up to the name.

Perhaps I'm jumping to conclusions just a bit. I suppose MLS could christen a team "Cosmos" and simply ignore the pressure to remake the NASL version in the modern day. We certainly wouldn't see the world's greatest player, even a past-his-prime one, in a Cosmos uniform. But it's not just a name, and Garber & Co. would certainly be aware of that. If the team doesn't live up to the legacy, would all of that name recognition go to waste? More specifically, would people show up for a team called "Cosmos" if they weren't the MLS version of a superclub?

All of this is moot, of course, if MLS can't find an ownership group to take the reigns of new franchise for New York City. Fred Wilpon thought better of his involvement when his fortune took a serious hit, and it's not clear there's ready replacement standing by. Perhaps the USL-1 team that will soon call the city home could move up, but that doesn't appear to be on the horizon quite yet (besides, FCNY hasn't even signed a player yet). The possibility, mentioned by Pinton, of christening the new Philadelphia franchise "Cosmos" clearly wouldn't work, make sense, or be fair to the Philly fans.

Pinton seems to think that a second team called the New York Cosmos could share Red Bull Arena and create a "true" derby situation for MLS. I like the idea, but I wonder about the execution; if NYRB has problems filling their brand new stadium next year, why would the league want to throw another team into the mix?

I'm veering off topic a bit, so let me get back to the original question. I'm actually a bit torn about bringing back the Cosmos; on one hand, doing it would immediately create heat for the league and American soccer. On the other hand, it seems gimmicky and shallow to put so much into what is simply a name.

A name with history though, and we don't have a lot of those.

I'll come down on the side of reviving the club because I think American soccer (and by extension, MLS) should do whatever it takes to draw attention.

What do you think? Cosmos or no Cosmos?