Monday, March 12, 2007

Learning to walk

I'm supposed to have my internet back up and running tomorrow. Something's wrong with the cable down at the street so it's not something I did (at least directly). It makes it ever so frustrating when I have to do get online the old-fashioned way. If I was just mindlessly going through some sites, I suppose it wouldn't be that big a deal but I do have to do some research and stuff online but this way makes it so frustrating.

Anyway, I just filed my most recent SI column. Instead of writing about the Mexican league or El Tri, I wrote about MLS clubs' struggles against their Mexican counterparts.

I'm expecting quite a bit of hate mail. For some reason, anytime I say the slightest negative thing about MLS or the USMNT, I get bombarded by American fans. I just hope people can read all the way through to the end of this column and then make an informed opinion based on what they read.

This, basically, was the premise of my column. Well, actually, I guess these stats helped me form the premise of my column, which is that MLS teams struggle against Mexican teams. I don't know how you could look at these results and think anything differently.

2002
QF: San Jose 0:3 Pachuca (first leg in MEX)
QF: San Jose 1:0 Pachuca (second leg in SJ)

QF: Chicago 0:2 Morelia (first leg in MEX)
QF: Chicago 2:1 Morelia (second leg in CHI)

QF: Kansas City 1:2 Santos (first leg in MEX)
QF: Kansas City 2:0 Santos (second leg in KC)

SF: Kansas City 1:6 Morelia (first leg in MEX)
SF: Kansas City 1:1 Morelia (second leg in KC)

2003
QF: Columbus 0:6 Morelia (in MEX)
QF: Columbus 2:0 Morelia (in COL)

QF: Galaxy 1:4 Necaxa (in CA)
QF: Galaxy 1:2 Necaxa (in MEX)

2005
SF: DC United 1:1 Pumas (in DC)
SF: DC United 0:5 Pumas (in MEX)

I love MLS. I hope MLS clubs do better in the future against all international competition. But I don't think that right now MLS is capable of playing Mexican or South American teams in tournaments and getting results consistently. I don't see it. The depth isn't there. The ability to pull out results on the road isn't there. The home-field advantage isn't there.

So many people have clamored over the years about letting MLS participate in Copa Libertadores. Heck, I was leading the charge at one point. But when you consider the poor history MLS clubs have against regional competition, what would happen against superior South American clubs? If two MLS teams can each give up six goals to - no disrespect - an average Mexican club, what would happen against a top Argentine side like River Plate?

Baby steps, people. First walk, then run. Hell, first sit up, then crawl, then learn to stand, then take a few steps, then walk, then walk fast, then shuffle rapidly, then run. I think MLS is starting to take a few steps.

5 comments:

Anonymous said...

I think that the only way for MLS clubs to get better is to constistenly play in top competition. It may be a rough going at first, but in the long term, they will learn and improve. They've got to start somewhere. I'd rather see them get beat by River Plate or Barcelona then advance against the likes of CD Olympia. At least an MLS season will finally start meaning something.

I also think that I would like to see how MLS teams do against quality competition when they are at their best. Right now, because of how the schedule it structured, MLS play in their top form in meaningless friendlies and they face tougher games (like the upcoming CONCAAF Championship games against Mexican teams) in preseason form.

Anonymous said...

Fixing the schedule may not get MLS sides to all of a sudden start winning down in Mexico, but it will certainly stop the 5:0 and 6:1 results.

I watched the DC-Pumas game 2 years ago that DC lost 5:0. The blowout was exclusively due to fitness issues. Most of the goals came in the second half, when DC was down to 10 men (due to a late tackle by Mike Petke who got beat because a Pumas guy just simply ran around him).

Yet this same DC team played a heck of a series vs Universitad Catolica in Copa Sudamericana later that year. The same Catolica that went to the semis of that tournament.

Were Pumas better team than DC in 2005? Probably. Were they 5 goals better. Hell no.

A.C. said...

I think one reason that Mexican clubs do so well against MLS teams versus the Mexican national team versus that of the U.S. is that the skill-focused game of MFL depends a lot on a high level of familiarity with one's teammates. Cuauh's backheel flicks are what his America teammates look for - not so much his NT teammates who play for Chivas or Tigres. There seems to be better chemistry among the league teams, and thier game feeds off of that.

The Manly Ferry said...

I can't imagine people ripping you for stating the obvious, though I have no doubt they do so. I'm not optimistic about Wednesday's and Thursday's games - though, for what it's worth, I think DC has a better shot than Houston - but I'm quite happy we're playing in a tournament of this sort. Even with the timing. If needs be, let the participating MLS clubs get started a bit earlier; if you can't change the schedule, adjust to it. But the only way to learn to swim is to get in the dang pool.

And I'd swallow a few Libertadores losses, bad ones too, in order to get MLS clubs just that little bit more hardened.

Anonymous said...

the score in the first game (Hou v. Pach) proves my point. I am not saying that Houston will necessarily advance, as Pachuca is a good team and is certainly capable of putting more than 2 goals in in Mexico. I would also concede they were unlucky not to score in the 1st half.

But I think certain MLS teams could hold their own in Copa Libertadores, particularly if the schedule is ever adjusted.

We'll see how DC United does.