This Is American Soccer, US Soccer, MNT, WNT, and MLS - Tackling the subject of Soccer in the US, and worldwide.

MLS expansion has come sooner than I thought it would. San Jose gets its Earthquakes back in 2008, giving the league 14 teams. Refilling a once (fairly) proven market seems like the safe choice, the right choice if you have to expand the league, but do you have to? Do you want to? There’s a lot more to this than it would first appear, and before I launch into a tirade about diluting an already weak player pool, I feel like I need to revisit the arguments here. 2010 is likely the next time we’ll have this topic in the headlines, so let’s see if we can’t figure it out.

I asked Steve Goff about expansion a few weeks ago, and his response touches on the points we need to reflect on now that it’s happening. First on the player pool:

Well, [expansion] won’t be a quick change. There is a chance there will be another team next year, but that might be rushing it. Maybe you add two more in 2010. There are a lot of players out there, it’s just a matter of the league spending the money for the quality. There’s million of potential professional soccer players out there in this world, and the league has to spend the money. You can’t rely on developmental players to support the league. You have to go out and spend the money to get the talent. So yeah, if you added three teams next year, I think that would be a problem, but if you do it slowly over the next few years, and at the same time increasing your payrolls, I think you should be OK.

Rushing it? A lot of players out there? It’s just a matter of the league spending the money for the quality?

Yes. Yes (in theory). Yes. Expansion in 2008 is rushing it. So much has been made about soccer specific stadiums, and while San Jose has a stadium plan, there is at present no stadium, making for the haphazard programs we see in places like New York. And it’s just the thing that MLS has been so against. So why rush San Jose back? You don’t bring the baby home before preparing the nursery, do you?

And then there is the baby. And I do mean babies. Of course there are a lot of players out there. There’s a lot of corn out there too, but only a portion of it is sweet corn; the rest is feed for animals. American soccer is lacking in sweet corn, but we’ve got tons of animal feed. Forget the 8, 9, 10 workable athletes on the line-up, any good professional sports team needs a star. MLS even more so. They need someone they can market. They need someone who will draw some fans. MLS has very few of these kind of players, and in that regard it is just a matter of the league spending the money for the quality. Or is it?

All the money in the world might not pull in the stars who want to be the world’s best and thus spurn MLS for Champions League prowess among other bonuses MLS can’t offer. In fact, expansion without solid players may only make matters worse, with MLS looking worse in terms of quality soccer, perpetuating the problem we constantly here from detractors here and abroad. And what with MLS purse strings being as tight as they are and franchise profit margins as delicate as blown glass, it seems unlikely there is going to be a charge for more designated players signings in the next year. Even further down the road is salary cap expansion, which really, should be what we’re talking about.

So that leaves the babies forced to grow up faster than they should. While American soccer players (not to mention San Jose soccer fans) are no doubt happy to have a few more roster spots, you have to wonder if some players are being well handled in MLS. Is development enhanced for these young players by playing with better players, or is their potential hindered by the need for immediate results - or even worse, sitting on the bench? Or EVEN WORSE, is it possible (I ask again) that expansion is perpetuating the argument that MLS is nothing more than a developmental league? I mean, MLS expansion drafts are like the witness protection program; the average fan has no clue who any of these players are, and the next time you hear their names, they’re probably fouling an opponent.

But to just leave it there would be unfair. MLS has more matters on its plate than just player pools, and all of them must be weighed before, you know, I go back and say that player dilution is ruining any tangential growth brought by other means. Put your leg up on the table Achilles. Don’t worry, you won’t feel a thing.

Back to Goff:

In terms of MLS, the biggest thing for them is to have a larger national footprint. There are 13 teams in MLS, and one of them is in Canada. Now you are down to 12. Two are in the same city, so you are down to 11 U.S. markets. And of those 11, one is Columbus, Ohio, small market. One is Salt Lake City, small market. So, nationally, they don’t really have much of a national presence. At some point they need to be in the Pacific Northwest; Florida, somewhere; They need to be in Philadelphia. They need to be in the San Francisco Bay Area. It’s hard for them to get national attention when they don’t have a national presence. But it depends on where investors are, and what is there. You can’t just drop teams in a city. They would love to be in Philadelphia right now, but until there is a proper investor and situation there, you won’t see a team there. Same thing with Seattle or Portland or San Jose. They tried in Florida; they wanted it to work in Florida, and it did not work in Florida. They had two teams there, and both for various reasons failed. You would think a soccer team in Florida would work, but until they have the right formula, they are not going to go back there.

It’s enough to make your head spin, and for that I can’t say I envy the league officials. More than embedded fan support, the right formula means the right owner, the right real estate, and the right politics to get it through the red tape. And maybe all of that is more important than players at this point. (Deep Breath, Stay With Me, Deep Breath) Maybe the league’s footprint is more important than the players’ footprints. Certainly, it’s quicker and easier to sign a big name player than it is build a stadium. Once we have our 18 - or whatever the golden number is these days - soccer specific stadiums, maybe then salary caps will rise, players will come, and not just for paydays and the ability to live the good life in the USofA, but because MLS grew thanks to gaurded expansion. Maybe Beckham is just a smoke screen - Hey look over here, la di da – a diversion from the reality of growth without flavor.

It’s a variation of the old chicken and egg quagmire: it’s not which came first, but which should come first: good play or good national distribution?

Boil the fowl embryo into two static parts and you have your choices. Do you want the hearty, meaty yolk that satisfies with the threat of poor health? Or do you want the nutritious egg white that while good for you, isn’t exactly the most pleasing dish? I know, I know, you want to scramble them up, grate some Beckham cheese on top, and have the best of both worlds. But that’s the diehard fan dreaming, with MLS responding - Let them wait. Let them eat cake!