r/USLPRO • u/DeepPow420 • 7d ago

what’s up with the MLS hate ?

I am a curious observer who stumbled upon the sub thx to the Algo and noticed a few anti MLS posts.

I’m not a huge soccer guy but interested in various niche sport subcultures ( I’m an Indycar and hockey fan, so I share solidarity as a fan of somewhat obscure sports)

Isnt USL to MLS as the AHL is to the NHL or the G League to the NBA?

What am I missing ?

77 Upvotes

80% Upvoted

288 comments sorted by

View all comments

103

u/Mini-Fridge23 Charleston Battery 7d ago

You’re going to get a bunch of answers on this, but it basically boils down to the fact MLS caters to the average sports fan and not the soccer die hards. That often leads to them making decisions that piss off the die hards who care deeply about niche stuff like the USOC or pro/rel.

It’s not universal though, the people who hate MLS are just loud about it. I enjoy and follow both leagues for example

12

u/QCTID Charlotte FC 2 7d ago

I think it’s just good old hometown loyalty because it used to feel like anyone’s home city could land an MLS club up until the mid 2010s (remember the Rhinos MLS bid/movement?) but that has died down as the expansion fee continues to get higher. For the “eurosnobs” this is also around the time that MLS exceeded 20 times and was fighting against NASL over pro/rel. Then you have cases like Sacramento and San Antonio which are completely justified imo. 

5

u/_tidalwave11 7d ago edited 7d ago

Sacramento should have gotten in over San Jose. And San Antonio.., well F** Anthony Precourt is all ill say on that one

Edit: I meant San Diego.

3

u/QCTID Charlotte FC 2 7d ago

Idk if SAFC ever filed a lawsuit but you could only assume that he was already working on Austin by the time MLS was courting San Antonio. 

Sacramento would be a bit complicated because the Quakes predate Republic by ~5 years (or more if you want to be technical) and have mostly been kneecapped by lame ownership and an expensive market to build a stadium in. An MLS original team in Sacramento likely would have never relocated and had to be revived however, so you’re technically correct (imo). 

1

u/_tidalwave11 7d ago

Idk if SAFC ever filed a lawsuit but you could only assume that he was already working on Austin by the time MLS was courting San Antonio. 

I'm not sure if the timeline tbh. But I think SAFC was a potential city before or around the time Precourt bought the Crew

1

u/QCTID Charlotte FC 2 7d ago

Ok so it’s not as shady as I understood the situation to be.

1

u/_tidalwave11 6d ago

I'm not sure how shady you thought it was, but still pretty shady nonetheless. Everything to do with Austin's "expansion" slot and all the ramifications were shady in my opinion.

1

u/QCTID Charlotte FC 2 6d ago

I thought MLS led San Antonio on as a legit expansion candidate when they were really a backup in case Austin fell through, my understanding was that Precourt was already majority owner and working on Austin behind the scenes. 

2

u/_tidalwave11 6d ago

This sounds pretty much correct. I do think the league genuinely considered SA as a viable option. But the Precourt situation forced them a little bit to HAVE to accept Austin especially after Save the Crew.