Here's the new show, with RBA, CBA, Dempsey, Davies, hooliganism, Ives Galarcep, and more. Click the logo to go to the website and listen there if you'd like.


You can also download it, subscribe in iTunes (and leave a rating and review, if you please), or get the regular old RSS feed.

And now, a few words from MFUSA's Super Fun Guide to the MLS CBA narrator:


Good day. Over the past few months, I have visited you in this space and attempted to provide a positive spin to the MLS collective bargaining process. The information was presented in the cheeriest possible manner, with an abundance of exclamation points, a solid dose of self-loathing (who wouldn't hate themselves, doing that job?), and an eye towards being as impartial as possible. Just the facts, in a Super Fun! format.


I thought I would be relieved when it finally came to an end. I thought the pain in my head would subside, my reliance on prescription drugs would disappear and the release would be liberating. Instead, I'm feeling a massive sense of loss over this sudden stealing of my life purpose. Who wants labor peace? Not me.


And so it is with with a heavy heart that I announce that the MLS Players Union and their rich, crusty old bosses have figured things out and have a new deal. Good for them, I suppose. I was very much looking forward to covering the strike in my Super Fun! style. Now I have no reason to the say "The players are striking! Signs on sticks and spirited chanting for everyone! And in a dozen languages so no one can understand you!"


Instead, let's do a quick review the stretch run to an agreement, in which the two sides heartlessly ripped away my raison d'etre:


A federal mediator with a sterling reputation was brought in to referee the situation.


Like a belt across the backside, Cohen stepped in to try and remind the two sides that if they didn't play nice, everyone was going to be grounded.


The players leaked a strike vote, at which point the owners had a fit and went all "disappointed father" on their employees.


What's worse than being unappreciated? Apparently nothing if you're a Major League Soccer investor. How dare they! Don't they know that my daddy saved this league?


A marathon negotiating session in Washington, DC forced the two sides together.


In between games Jenga and Balderdash, mediator guy Cohen coordinated the hammering out of small points in an effort to get movement on the big stuff. It was all very "rainy day at summer camp".


Suddenly, without warning and before anyone who might want to had time to get drunk enough to dull the effect, the two sides announced an agreement.


In what will go into the record books as the World's Most Disappointing Conference Call, and by a wide margin, Garber, Foose, Cohen and Donovan babbled about the new deal (while carefully avoiding details), and credited the others with getting the agreement done. So much so that "Get a room!" was yelled by at least fourteen people listening to the conference call via live streaming audio.

***


I suppose all there is left to do now is analyze the fallout. Did the players get what they wanted? Have the vestiges of bondage been cast asunder? Did the owners hold on to control? Can they return to their enormous money vaults to swim in their mountains of cash safe in the knowledge that MLS will forever be a bastion of financial ultra-conservatism?


You know what? I don't care. That's it for me. I'm done. Those bastards put me through hell, making me smile idiotically and speak in excited tones over something that was in reality so depressing it made my soul hurt. Do the people a favor and spin the CBA nonsense, and this is what I get? A Vicodin dependence and a liver the size of a chili pepper? This lump on my neck probably isn't filled with Skittles. Bah.


None of this was super fun. It was all super crappy. But good for you people, with your soccer league that won't be delayed. Have fun with that.


I'm off to find myself a BOTTLE OF WHISKEY! And maybe a DUMPSTER TO CRAWL INTO! I'm going to PASS OUT FOR THREE DAYS! And subject myself to BAD REALITY TELEVISION! WOO!


Bye then, you ungrateful wanks!


If you missed the other installments of the Super Fun! series, which are now completely and utterly irrelevant, you can do so via the links below. I'm off to schedule an intervention.


Part I: The Basics
Part II: The Demands
Part III: Legal Junk & Compliance Stuff
Part IV: Propaganda

While reviewing my posts leading up to the 2009 MLS season, I came across a series of posts I did in the week leading up to the First Kick where I ran down the top ten story lines of the year. I'd almost forgotten I had done those posts, and it struck me how abnormal the 2010 buildup has been.


The season kicks off on Thursday with the debut of the Philadelphia Union against the Sounders in Seattle. It didn't exactly sneak up on me, but because so much focus was on the collective bargaining process, the potential for a strike, and the back and forth between the players and owners, I haven't been able to give the proper attention to the typical previews, predictions, and discussion. I'm not sure if that's a good thing or a bad thing.


But I do head into each MLS season and an eye towards the most intriguing potential story lines. Sometimes those relate to individual teams and their fortunes, others it's about off-field issues like attendance, stadiums, marketing, etc. 2010 is no different, with a mixture of items from the actual competition as well as the business of the league.


Instead of counting down a list of story lines over the course of days as I did last year, let's just get this out of the way in a quick and dirty fashion; it seems appropriate after all of the uncertainty.


10. Sounders sophomore year

Doesn't sound like there will be a slump in the Northwest, and the boys in Rave Green have to be considered real contenders in the West.

9. RSL's repeat campaign

RSL wasn't impressive during the 2009 regular season but turned in a wonderful playoff run; can they improve upon their record and give it another go?

8. Dynamo fortunes

Holden and Clark are gone, and Dom Kinnear may be in for his toughest coaching job yet.

7. The Wizard's international overhaul

Turnover in Kansas City was massive this off-season, and Peter Vermes has a team no one can really figure out. Either they'll be playoff contenders, or they'll crash and burn in a gigantic fireball that will be riveting to watch.

6. No Becks

I didn't really want to include this, I swear. But no Beckham until at least September, and possibly not at all, does change the league dynamic just a bit. More interesting than his absence post-World Cup might be the progress he makes towards returning to LA. Does he care enough?

5. Summer signings

There's already at least one player coming in after the World Cup, Blaise N'Kufo to Seattle, that could have an impact on the season. But will there be more, and if so, who will they be? Will New York finally get their marquee name?

4. World Cup impact

More American eyes will be on soccer than usual in a World Cup year, and with all that has changed with MLS since 2006, the league might be in a better position to capitalize. The break is a good move, but will the league see a bump in attendance and attention afterwards?

3. The Union

Finally, that word in day-to-day usage can mean just the Philadelphia expansion team. The fortunes of the Union, both on the field and in the stands are a major focus for me this season. A nice June PR bump with the opening of PPL Park should bring the club even more regional attention.

2. Attendance

2009 was a down year for MLS attendance, something that can be mostly attributed to the economy. Although the recession isn't exactly over, there's reason to believe numbers will go up in 2010.

1. Red Bull Arena

As the opening on Saturday night showed, Red Bull Arena is one of a kind in this part of the world. The $200 million soccer palace will be a star throughout the season, though it will help if the Red Bulls are good and the stands stay full.


Like I said, quick and dirty. I'm probably missing more than a few interesting things for the 2010 season, so step up and fill in the gaps.


First Kick is Thursday. How did that happen?

Cancel the panic, turn off the alarms: There will be an on-time start to the MLS season thanks to a spirit of cooperation (and the aid of federal mediators) infecting the MLSPU and the owners.


Let this be a lesson to you; all the hype, nonsense, and wasted words on a likely - nay, inevitable - strike was just that. Nonsense.


I was as guilty as anyone else of buying what the Players were selling. Though I stated my belief that there would not be a strike on more than one occasion, that doesn't mean I was confident. Psychic, I was not. I was just pragmatic in my assessment of the Players' position and the gains to be had from a walk out (there weren't many).


In the end, it came down to the League picking its battles and a promise (that's how I read it) from management to work cooperatively with labor in the future. If the Players believe that the 5 year deal they just agreed to will eventually lead to full free agency and other "FIFA rights" as they want, then good for them. But without knowing the details, it appears to me that they saw a chance to save face, get a few concessions, and walk away with their heads held high. Not exactly a full victory, but enough of one to make it worth it.


Because in the end, it looks like the Players appreciated the situation MLS and soccer in the US and Canada is in; there's just too much at stake for a strike to make much sense. This isn't to say that the Players bent over, or that they "caved"; I'm simply implying that their ultimate wishes (read: everything) weren't on the table. The power of the Union was mitigated by the youth of the league, the unprofitably of its clubs, and imperative that MLS continue uninterrupted and without the black stain of a labor stoppage.


It's hard, after all of the strike talk and rhetoric, to see this as anything but a well-played game of poker by the owners. The Players pushed in all their chips, were called, and found themselves in need of a sympathetic management group. Hopefully, because it's important that the Players got something out of the process, that's exactly what happened. Those owners that spoke out over the last week on the possibility of a strike were just playing the PR game as so many individual players did throughout the process. I realize it's tough to believe there was benevolence on the part of a collection of millionaires, and they certainly did what they could to protect their business interest, but there's reason to believe that Garber, or Abbott, or the mediator Cohen, imparted upon the Hunts and Krafts of the world that giving a little would get them a lot.


That's what 2010 is: A LOT. From Red Bull Arena to the World Cup bump to filling the stands in Seattle, Toronto, and elsewhere, 2010 is a crucial year for the league. Fifteen seasons, in the United States of America, with 30,000 people showing up for matches and $200 million stadiums debuting in the biggest media city in the world, is nothing to sneeze at.


We'll know details soon. Many more words will be written evaluating who the real winners and losers were. I may (or probably will) write something on the subject myself. Maybe I'll close out the Super Fun! series with an overview of the deal. But thank god that will be the end of it. We're not soccer fans because of what happens in boardrooms.


Storylines that can (thankfully) be retired:


Will Landon go back to Everton in the event of a strike?
Will the owners hire scabs?
Will the fans turn their backs on the league?
Who were the two "no"s when the players took their original vote?


Excuse the ramble. I'm exuberant because cooler heads prevailed. I'm excited for the new season. Let's go play some soccer (them, not me, obviously)!

If you haven't heard by now, Major League Soccer has scheduled a 1 PM ET conference call with all of the major players involved. Rumor is strong that this means a deal has been reached, and that a strike will be averted.


MLS has made the call available to media, but if you'd like to listen in, it will be streamed live as it happens at the American Soccer Show website via our UStream feed.


Big sighs of relief all around...

First, Charlie Davies nearly lost his life in a deadly car crash, sustaining terrible injuries in the process. The very next day Oguchi Onyewu ruptured his patellar tendon. Two massive parts of the US World Cup plans, out for months, and with prognoses that would make their World Cup comebacks difficult to imagine.


Then Clint Dempsey injures his knee while playing for Fulham. Benny Feilhaber picks up an injury in Denmark. Ricard Clark's inclusion in Eintracht Frankfurt's squad is delayed due to a muscle problem. Even Jose Franciso Torres felt the sting of a temporary knock. Add Stuart Holden, who broke his leg in the USMNT friendly against the Netherlands, and the Americans had a full-fledged injury apocalypse on their hands.


And yet here we are, less than ninety days from the tournament, and there's a reasonable chance all of those names will be healthy and available to play in South Africa. If Davies and Onyewu are anywhere near their pre-injury form come June 1st, each is a mortal lock for the squad, while Holden dropped word on Facebook and Twitter today that he's out of his cast and walking on crutches. With a little luck, he'll be playing again shortly, and most of us would pencil him into our World Cup 23's without a second thought.


Double super bonus if Bundesliga standout Jermaine Jones miraculously recovers in time for June.


It seems to me that Bob Bradley (and by extension, the US fan base) is damn lucky. Of course he would have rather that Davies not find himself in that car in October, or that Onyewu hadn't landed funny while contesting a ball in the air. But injuries happen. Perhaps not on this large a scale, but they will always play a role in how a World Cup roster is constructed. Still, barring any major catastrophes (anything worse than a muscle pull or ankle sprain, at least up until the middle of May), Bradley will likely have every player he might want at his disposal, with the possible exception of the aforementioned Davies and Jone. Davies situation is just too unique to make a call on quite yet, and Jones has such a long recovery from his shin fracture that speculating on his return now would be impossible.


So what was panic only a month or two ago can give way to a sense of relief. There's still the little matter of each of the players returning from injury getting back to form, but no longer does the injury shadow linger over the team. There's even an argument available that some of the players in question will be fresher in June for having had a bit of time off in the first quarter of the year; that could be an overly positive spin, but it's not impossible.


Injuries are bad, but getting them out of the way "early" (if such a thing is possible) could be the Americans' saving grace in South Africa.


No more injuries from here on out, though, okay boys? If we're not past the point of no return yet, it's rapidly approaching.


Misfortune kicked the US in the ass for a couple of months there; let's hope it has moved on to others (Englad would be nice, though I'm not really wishing injury on their players...)

by Dan Wiersema - Free Beer Movement

Editor's note: Yesterday, a piece fairly typical of major media outlets when discussing Americans and soccer showed up at the New York Times website. Titled "The World (Minus the U.S.) Cup", it lays out the writer's case for why Americans just don't "get" soccer. In a special guest appearance at MFUSA, Dan Wiersema of the Free Beer Movement responds point by point.


Text from the piece follows, with Dan's responses in italics.

***

If you are a man, you know the feeling. At a party, you encounter a beautiful woman, perhaps a tad exotic. She speaks with a hint of an accent — South American? — and she dresses a notch above the people you hang around with. Is that a Sapphire martini in her hand? You think about approaching her. But in the end, you shy away.

America is that man. The World Cup is the exotic, unattainable object of fascination. The Quadrennial Awkward Date resumes.

First off, this is just the worst bit of metaphor I've read in a while. Must Read Soccer better save some space for worst writing of the week because we've got a nomination right here. I've written better leads when I wrote for my high school newspaper. Honestly, if America was at that party... America would walk over (being the greatest country in the world) and charm the shit out of that South American? hottie. Case closed. Metaphor over.


It would be great if Americans could embrace the World Cup, because then big U.S. sponsors could make even more money.

Big U.S. sponsors already make a ton of money from the World Cup. Take a look at the sponsors of the upcoming Cup: Coca Cola, McDonald's, Continental, Visa, Castrol, and many more. You don't think they didn't get into the game to grab a slice of the pie? Those are some of the biggest companies in the world. Not to mention Nike who isn't sponsoring the competition, but might as well for how often they'll show up there.


The American audience for the World Cup has increased in past years, but rarely approaches the viewership for red-white-and-blue sporting events. This year’s (admittedly excellent) Super Bowl attracted over 100 million couch potatoes. The mind-blowing, head-butting 2006 Italy-France World Cup final lured 17 million American viewers.

The problem being that when you compare finals head to head, yes, the World Cup comes up short. Too bad the tournament isn't... wait... JUST ONE GAME. So let's multiply 17 million viewers times 64 matches, OK? How about we compare one massive tournament in the U.S. to the World Cup and see how they match up? In 2009 the NCAA basketball championship game between North Carolina and Michigan State garnered 17.6 million viewers. Oh wait! That's almost EXACTLY the same as American views of the World Cup... must be that college basketball hasn't arrived yet in the United States. Oh, and another thing, the 2006 World Cup ratings in the U.S. you cited was a 152 PERCENT increase from 2002 whereas the NCAA tourney finals has seen a decrease over the last five years. You want more? The World Cup final regularly outdraws the NBA Finals and World Series in the U.S.


For Americans, soccer is just not a sport you play hooky for. What American boy hasn’t played sick to watch a World Series baseball game a few times in his life? I feigned many a flu to watch Juan Marichal of the San Francisco Giants pitch against Sandy Koufax of the Los Angeles Dodgers, back when dinosaurs roamed the earth. But I can confidently predict that classrooms will be full, and workplace absenteeism will be at normal levels, when the United States plays its first round matches in South Africa this June.


Soccer is a sport you play hooky for. During the 2002 World Cup in Korea/Japan I faked having to take my little sister to basketball camp every morning so I could show up late to work. I've taken over a week of vacation from my job to travel to both Washington DC to see USA versus Costa Rica on a Wednesday and USA against Honduras in Los Angeles. Those are stories that were repeated by almost every other soccer fan I met there. Those committed to even water polo skip work to watch their sports. Be surprised... watch the work place numbers this year.


Why? For one thing, America has yet to develop a soccer culture. It’s the most popular youth sport in the country — there is lots of “sharing” — but in most surveys, professional soccer ranks 10th or lower in fan interest, after stock car racing and several college sports.

According to this recent Harris poll there is no foundation (other than the author's mind) that soccer falls outside the top ten for fan interest in the sport. In fact, soccer ranks in the top ten while numerous other sports have seen dramatic drops in popularity (i.e. baseball, men's tennis, etc). And what the fuck is that random aside about "there is lots of sharing"? What do you mean by that? What place does that have in this professional journalism writing? Are you against sharing? Is that some frat boy inside joke about soccer?


To indulge some gross stereotypes, white Dads play catch with their sons in their backyards. Black kids play basketball. Hispanic-American kids may play soccer, but there are only one or two of them on the 20-man American roster.

Great now you're engaging in stereotypes to justify your argument. I'm sure that's going to go over real well. Another factual error here as well. The US roster contains 23... TWENTY THREE players. And among those 23 players include such notable Hispanic Americans (which by the way IS NOT the proper way to call Latinos... "Hispanic" implies they are from the island Hispaniola (Haiti and the Dominican Republic) and not from Latin America. I digress... Carlos Bocanegra, Jose Fransisco Torres, Edgar Castillo, Alejandro Bedoya, Jonathan Borenstein (Jewish-Mexican), and Nick Rimando to name a few recent USMNTers. So that's more than "one or two". Again, good research.


For another thing, U.S. soccer just isn’t cool. It’s no accident that the only TV ad I remember from the last World Cup featured the Brazilian soccer team horsing around in the locker room, bouncing a soccer ball off of every conceivable appendage while grooving to samba music.

Did you see what our boys did to the "cool" Brazilians in the Confederations Cup last summer? Black is the new white. USA is the new Brazil.


Where do they get those names, anyway? Dida, Cafu, Kaká, Fred. By comparison, the current U.S. team roster reads like the letterhead of a white-shoe law firm: Evans, Goodson, Findley & Marshall.

Where do I start here? Evans... not on the team. Goodson... maybe. Findley... not if Charlie Davies is back. Marshall... nope. Oh, how about "law-firm" names Onyewu, Bocanegra, Cherundolo, Hejduk, Bedoya, Klejstan, Torres, Edu, and Adu.


Who are you going to fall in love with? Nice white boys from California and the mid-Atlantic states, suburbs, or the funky futbolistas of the favelas?

Sigh. Exhibit A: Clint Dempsey. Grew up rural poor in Nacgodoches, Texas. Had to drop out of soccer so his sister (who died by the way) could play travel tennis. The rest of his team raised money so he could still play with them. How about Freddy Adu (if he ever gets another look), who's single mother immigrated from the Ivory Coast Ghana so he and his brother could play soccer in the U.S.? Or maybe Jay DeMerit from Green Bay, Wisconsin who paid his way to a tryout out with a non-league side in England and then was picked up and is now the captain of Watford, a big English club. I'll fall in love with my Yanks.


And it’s not just the Brazilians. The current English national team is a hotbed of wife-and-girlfriend swapping intrigue. I haven’t seen an American footballer on the front page of the New York Post, well, ever.

Maybe you missed it, but the same thing happened over here. The news broke at the same time, but you were probably too busy being entranced by the "sexy" English scandal. John Harkes, back in 1998 slept with fellow USMNTer Eric Wynalda's wife. Harkes was then dropped from the 1998 squad. This was all just revealed, but if there were any mainstream journos following soccer back them you could have easily uncovered it and added to the "intrigue" back then.


Big-time soccer cued up its shot in the U.S. and missed. Football god David Beckham was supposed to save the American game when he joined the Los Angeles Galaxy in 2007, but he never broke through, on the field or in the popular imagination. Not only was he bedeviled by injuries, but his greatest skill — serving parabolic passes from the outside midfield — is one that scoring-obsessed Americans could never appreciate. His wife Victoria’s frenzied attempt to become a celebrity in a town that already had celebrities, thank you, likewise gained little traction.

The only people that said that Beckham was going to "save" American soccer were the people that hoped that soccer in this country dies. It’s a set-up argument. If I said, "the New England Patriots MUST not lose a game this season and win the Super Bowl otherwise football is dead" and then they don't do it... I win. I certainly don't remember anyone in any position of authority, not commissioner Don Garber, the president of the Galaxy, or Beckham himself saying he was here to "save" American soccer. Soccer in America DOES NOT NEED SAVING. It is strong, stable, and growing in this country. Only from pretentious fucks like you maybe who keep looking for the silver bullet to slay the sport here.


The Beautiful People assembled to tout the opening of the David Beckham Soccer Academy in Los Angeles in 2005. When it closed a few months ago, a brief press release did the job.

So what? His flashy, exclusive soccer camp closed. Too bad you mentioned earlier in the article that soccer is the largest youth sport in the nation so I think soccer for kids will be just fine.


Hope springs eternal at ESPN, the network that will broadcast the games to most Americans. On the one hand, ESPN’s vice president of programming Scott Guglielmino allows that if, by some miracle, the American team plays deep into the month-long tournament, that could produce a possible ratings bonanza.

But no matter what, this summer's World Cup WILL BE a "ratings bonanza" because viewership is up across the board for soccer. Face it.... ESPN is doubling down on soccer in the country. They are investing in the English Premier League, Major League Soccer, and even rolling out 3D TV for this summer's Cup. The Worldwide Leader in Sports intends to make soccer in this country.


Just in case, he says the network will be rolling out some “team predictor” Web software that will match fans up to teams whose style of play they might enjoy. “It’s O.K. to root for more than one team,” he says. “We want the non-core fan to buy in and connect with the World Cup.”

That sounds like ... a dating service.

Great another good 'ol boy joke at the expense of soccer. Good one. You got us there.

F&*% YOU. We will win.


For more info on the Free Beer Movement, a wonderful concept to get more fans to the sport of soccer, visit the website.

If there is a strike, the players will lose.


It doesn't matter what side you're on, whether you think the players are greedy and spoiled and the owners are white knights trying to keep this frail little operation afloat, or whether you think the owners are corporate fat cats reaping huge profits and living high on the hog off of the underpaid backs of working class dreamers, the reality is simple enough. If there is a strike, the players will lose.


The MLS Players' Union has drawn free agency as its line in the sand. The owners have said it's not happening. If there is no agreement, there will be a strike. If there is a strike, the players will lose.


In the other big American sports leagues, it's billionaires versus millionaires, and the billionaires win. Most MLS players are trying to keep up with their car payments, not buying fleets of Bentleys. The players simply do not have the financial wherewithal to outlast the owners. If there is a strike, the players will lose.


One after another, the League has been rolling out the owners to say they won't give in to a strike. This is not a stupid group of men. This is not a naive group of men. If they thought that their best interests would be served by giving in, they would have given in in January. They think that they can outlast the players in the event of a strike. They're right. If there is a strike, the owners will win. If there is a strike, the players will lose.


Now we could all be getting the wrong idea here. Maybe the players are making a big stink about free agency, knowing it won't happen, and at the midnight hour, they'll coyly offer to settle in return for guaranteed contracts. Maybe. I hope. But if they're actually this serious about free agency, they'll have to strike. If there is a strike, the players will lose.


I'd be willing to bet money that the owners have a contingency plan in case of a strike. Mostly really, because that's exactly what Dave Checketts said:

"We have a plan if the players strike"

I'd be willing to bet monopoly money on that plan involving alternate players. Grab some out of season European players on loan, some cheap Central American players, undrafted college players, unattached former MLS-ers (hello, Khano Smith!), and pretty soon, you've got enough bodies to fill out a few team-sheets, and it wouldn't take more than a couple of weeks. You'd have to call off a couple games, and it might not be ideal, but it'd make the fans happier than no soccer at all, and increase the pressure on the Union to cave. Kasey Keller might be able to hold out for a while, but how about players like Mike Chabala, or Wells Thompson, who each made a whopping thirty-four grand last year? Even a relatively well-paid player like Dema Kovalenko, who made $130,000, will give in eventually. If there is a strike, the players will lose.


And until the players realize that they have lost, we will all lose, and the longer they hold out, the more we lose.

Despite the fact that Twitter has experienced an explosion over the past year and seems completely ingrained in the Internet culture at this point, I realize that not everyone partakes in the social media movement.


That said, Twitter is a major part of my day-to-day interaction with fans, other bloggers, and players. Because I've managed (somehow) to attract a decent following, I thought I'd use Twitter to take the temperature of MLS fans only a few days before a possible labor stoppage.


The response was interesting on a couple of different levels, and none of them scientific or illuminating on a mass scale. But it's the fan that is being left holding their you-know-what in this whole thing, so I wanted to get direct window into the thoughts of a few.


Here was my first question, paraphrased a bit to give it clarity:

How frustrated are you on a scale from 1 (not at all) to 10 (ready to give up on MLS)?

@hardcoco

"A five right now. If Monday becomes strike day, it will be even higher."


@MrTuktoyaktuk:

"I'm not quite at the rage level yet, I'd say a '3'."


@JFreedman13:

"I'll put it at a 5 because i'll never give up on the league, but this whole strike thing is tearing me apart. This could kill soccer."


@coachjginn:

"10. 2 new clubs not being showcased is huge. But most of all, Im an RSL fan. This is their most stignificant year, defending the CUP."


@shwaxinator:

"8 - I sympathize with the plyrs, but theyre snubbing their nose at all who've sacrificed money and career to lay leagues groundwork."


@stoehrst:

"I'm probably at a 7 level of bitterness. 5 to the players, 9 to the owners."


That last response is interesting because "stoehrst" rates his frustration level differently for each side involved; he clearly sees the owners as more at fault than the players. I received several other responses along these lines, with the higher frustration level invariably aimed at management over labor.


The clock is ticking, and though I think there is plenty of time for a deal to get done before any of the season is threatened (and still believe there will be a deal without a strike), certain fans have more reason to be nervous than others. Phialdelphia Union fans, and specifically those involved in the Son of Ben group, might be the most anxious. Not only is the debut of their club in jeopardy, a large group of supporters plan to attend the game in Seattle next week.


@Thomas19064:

"frustrated on a scale of 9...... probably extra because I'm a philly fan getting into panic mode though......."


And because I was curious as to how many fans might support the players to the hilt regardless of the possible fallout (delay, lost season, etc.), I asked one more question:

How many of you would rather see a strike than have the players take a deal that doesn't include free agency?

What exactly constitutes "free agency", and what form it needs to take to sate the players isn't exactly clear, so keep that in mind as you read the responses.


@stoehrst:

"not me. Take what you can get this time around. Guaranteed contracts would be a huge step in the right direction"


@Longshoe:

"No strike, it could be a death blow to the league. Get the best deal possible and let's go."


@abemedoff:

"I sympathize with the players but I'd rather a compromise than a strike leaving me with worthless tickets"


@CBielstein:

"I would not. MLS has weird player ownership rules, but no soccer, no money, no league. If USSF2 is the top, we're screwed"


@midnightrevs:

"I think it's important that the players carry through with their threats. That being said I think they should strike."


I expected a few more "They should strike!" responses, but most of the respondents simply want there to be games next week. Apparently few of my followers on Twitter track with my podcast co-host or the opinion of Dennis Justice.


@hardcoco:

"I don't care what happens between both parties. I just want to watch some #MLS next week."


That's the bottom line for most people. Those of use the live and breath every detail and development in the process get wrapped up in the philosophical arguments and "right and wrong" of it all. Most people don't, or refuse to care more about how the league is run than the games themselves.


Oh, and if for some reason you'd like to follow me on Twitter, I'm @MFUSA.

Even when they play pretty well, MLS teams just can't win in Mexico.


It happened to the Crew last night against Toluca in the second leg of their CONCACAF Champions League quarterfinal series, and means that once again MLS fails to get a team into the semifinal round of the tournament. I think we're all pretty used to it at this point.


In fact, we're probably so used to it that this post will avoid all of the usual discussion of why MLS teams can't make a dent in international competition (roster restrictions, salary caps, and the knockout stages being in pre-season). Either you're of the opinion that MLS stinks and its teams choke abroad, or you take the different financial world that MLS teams operate in into account and blame circumstance; either way, it looks like it's going to be a long while before an American club wins the thing, and there's no point in wringing our hands over it any more than we already have.


Columbus acquitted themselves admirably, though definitely deserved to lose in the end. Toluca hit the post on three different occasions, and would have been hard done by had Zinha not steered two wonderful free kicks in for goals. Even then, Columbus just needed a goal to win the series, since a 5-5 aggregate score would have had them through on away goals. But their effort was crippled by the loss of Steven Lenhart to a red card (I'm still not sure what happened, just that the card came for something "off the ball"), another seemingly typical occurrence for American clubs when they go south of the border.


On the one hand, it would have been nice to see the lone MLS team left progress in the Champions League. On the other, the pressure on MLS to make some concessions to allow their clubs to better compete in the tournament becomes that much greater with the Crew loss. Don Garber gives lip service to the idea that MLS clubs need to do better in these competitions and if he is not just blowing smoke, he needs to take action. The pressure increases further if MLS clubs do poorly in the group stages of the 2010-2011 Champions League later this year.


Most disappointing for me last night was the play of Robbie Rogers. I wouldn't call myself a fan of his, but I did believe him capable of more. Too often his decision making was poor or he put himself in situations where he no longer had options. Like many MLS players, Rogers seems to have ample athletic ability without the soccer instincts to match.


Disappointing play from Rogers (and others) aside, Crew fans should be extremely encouraged about their league chances heading into the season. They looked good enough to be Eastern Conference favorites to me.


Now if they could stop fouling people 25 yards from goal...

There's a season coming, and I felt the obligation to write a brief preview. The only problem is that we're still not quite sure what will happen with the MLS labor negotiations, and I didn't want to write something that would be useless if the players strike and the season is delayed or cancelled.


So you get this; a general, shallow, and ultimately worthless thumbnail sketch preview that is nevertheless applicable no matter what happens. Simply follow the footnotes to relevant league/team as the situation, or your own preference, dictates. This is harder than it looks, by the way, so if I stretched things a bit in a few cases, I apologize. At least it can't become obsolete.

***

Squads are filling out, preparations are intense, and the new season is just around the corner. Hope is at it's highest levels as fans around the country harbor dreams of a championship for their beloved teams.


This season will feature stiff competition for the title. North of the border, there is real hope a Canadian team can find themselves contenders¹. It will be on the veterans to push the club where they're fan base believes they belong, at the top of the table and in position for a high playoff seed.


Down south, the club whose owner who also has Premier League interests and the English head coach hopes to make the playoffs after missing out in 2009², while New York's team has big plans after coming up short of their goals³ last year. A new team is starting up in an American soccer hotbed, and has designs on making an immediate impact on the league⁴ with their regional history and built-in fan base.


International flavor and a future that involves finally getting out of a baseball/soccer stadium sharing situation has things looking up elsewhere⁵, and though the focus might be off the field for now, the club won't be throwing in the towel on 2010.


There are intriguing stories around the league. From the mid-Atlantic team with the famous name needing a big season⁶ and hoping to settle their stadium situation to the men in orange looking to repeat their strong 2009 regular season finish but hoping for better luck in the playoffs⁷.


There's the club with the Latin flavor trying to get over the hump⁸, the southern team hoping to turn around fairly dismal attendance⁹, the Scot-led club with more than a few questions⁹, and the mid-west squad with the beer-loving fan base and legitimate playoff hopes¹⁰.


The long off-season, full of often unbearable anticipation is finally over. From coast to coast, every club believes they have a chance to make their mark on 2010, and have little time to prepare themselves for the battle. While talent may ultimately decide the champion, one can never discount the role luck will play, and fans everywhere have their fingers crossed.


¹Toronto FC or Vancouver/Montreal
²Colorado Rapids or Austin Aztex
³New York Red Bulls or Rochester Rhinos
⁴Philadelphia Union or AC St. Louis
⁵Kansas City Wizards or Portland Timbers
⁶DC United or Crystal Palace Baltimore
⁷Houston Dynamo or Carolina Railhawks
⁸Chivas USA or Puerto Rico Islanders
⁹New England Revolution or Tampa Bay Rowdies
¹⁰Chicago Fire or NSC Minnesota Stars

I'm strongly tempted to declare myself done with MLS today. The news is bad, the gathering storm is apparently ready to let loose, and that thing I was so sure wouldn't happen probably will. So much for my powers of prognostication (though on the small chance they don't actually strike, I'll definitely be claiming victory). It's a dark, dark day for any fan of American soccer, and will only be darker still next week.


But I can't actually pull the trigger on giving up because I know I'll just be back when things are sorted out (and the will get sorted out, right?). It would make me a hypocrite to say I'm done with it now if I just pick it back up again when the league is running at full strength at some point in the future.


It's doubtful that MLS would delay the season longer than it would take to fill out club rosters with scabs (not to mention the line crossers). It wouldn't be the same, and I can't honestly say I'd be interested beyond curiosity, but it would still be MLS. Insert a joke here about how the quality of play can't get any worse anyway.


So I'm contemplating my feelings today as I'm sure many fans are, and even though the strike isn't yet official, it's hard not to be depressed. So many good things flushed away, and so many passionate fans treated like a security guard's leg under the wheels of John Terry's Range Rover.


On the off chance the players are able to squeeze out of the owners what they want, I suppose the strike would be termed a success. Even if they don't, I'm sure they'll see it as a worthwhile exercise in "not backing down" and "standing up for our rights". To me, those are just words, and will do nothing to mitigate the damage we'll see in plain sight as the league attempts to recover. If DC United, LA, and Seattle are drawing half their usual crowds come May, who will take the brunt of the blame? The owners, for refusing to hand the players what some people see as basic rights? Or the players for walking out when the league needed to move forward unencumbered the most?


I don't think it matters, though I'm sure that many words will be written in an effort to figure it all out. Those words will matter less when people who were once interested in the league are no longer reading pieces on it. Disillusionment will be a bitch.


Apologies for the maudlin rant today, but I'm simply frustrated.


Let's see your thoughts on today's news; anyone reasonably positive still? Those of you for "Power to the players", are you giddy with excitement?


Oh, and I'm done writing on this in this space until there's A) a strike or B) and agreement. I'm not going to waste everybody's time with the breaking down of public statements or analysis of the latest nugget out of Washington.