There’s definitely pros and cons to expansion. The plus side has a lot to do with money. Not just the $30M+ per team, but also all the attendance revenue that Portland, Vancouver, and Montreal will surely generate.

The downside though is that the average talent level of MLS has dropped slightly by allowing in lesser teams and lesser players.

As the league continues to add more teams in cities that will have good soccer crowds, they also have to accept the diminishing product on the field. The only alternative would be to delete poorly supported teams when new teams are added.

This is something that MLS used to do pretty often in its early years. Is it something the league should revisit?

The question is why they didn’t sign that talent. Is it cost? A lack of willingness to come to MLS? The cost-benefit ratio of these better players? It’s probably some combination of these and many other factors. It’s definitely not that the talent isn’t out there, since MLS is very far from the best league in the world. Leagues all across the world are roughly equivalent to MLS, especially once you throw out the 2-3 big clubs that dominate leagues worldwide. We don’t have the problem of English clubs, who can afford anyone but have to pick the cream of the crop. They’re shopping for Ferraris at a tiny dealership that offers clients cigars and brandy; we’re shopping at Carmax. We might not be able to afford every car on the lot, but there are more than enough economy models that won’t fall apart.

If GMs aren’t using their international slots, they’re either adept at assembling good American talent (see: Houston and LA, both of whom start 7 or more Americans regularly) or bad at their jobs (see: Colorado’s annual mediocrity). More often, I think they’re just not doing enough (or are not allowed…I’m guessing Mike Burns probably doesn’t even bother to ask the Krafts for money to pursue anyone at this point). There’s no good reason, for example, that United entered the season carrying an extra international slot while also having the low-quality roster that we have. There are simply too many players worldwide for there to be no one that would both fit under our cap space and improve this team.

The money gained from expansion (both from the lump-sums up front and the long-term revenue gains) has helped add more high-end talent. It has also slowed (but not stopped) the annual migration of MLS’s upper-middle class talents to Scandinavia. However, it has done nothing to upgrade the median MLS player’s talent. In fact, with the retraction of the reserve league, the odds of a rough diamond being polished are lower than they were just a couple years ago. While MLS’s upper-level talent is now pretty good (and possibly poised to get even better with the new DP rules), the bread-and-butter player has been treading water for too long.

As for your last statement, looking at it only by attendance is overly simplistic. The driving force behind a push for DPs has been the more ambitious teams, not the best-attended. How else can you explain that the two biggest DP signings to this point both came from teams founded in the Logan era (Beckham in LA, Blanco in Chicago)? What about the fact that LA and DC made up half the list of teams whose owners were pushing hard for more DPs in the offseason (along with Seattle and NY, who under the Red Bulls are completely different from the Logan-era Metrostars for the purpose of this argument)? The charge for more DPs has more to do with wealthy owners who want to make noise than it does attendance.

Academies are a great idea, but only as long as teams are really aggressive about making it work. DC, NY, and Houston have all pulled up multiple players from their academy system (NY has forwards Juan Agudelo and Giorgi Chirgadze, who is out for the season with a hip problem, while the Dynamo has 3rd string keeper Tyler Deric and winger Francisco Navas Cobo). They’re vital for MLS’s long-term future, and the league needs to continue its forward momentum there.

However, I’m talking about the short- and medium-term. The academies aren’t going to always produce Najars and Hamids, especially for the clubs in less soccer-mad areas. I can’t imagine the Wizards academy is going to amaze anyone, for example. What are we going to do in the meantime to improve MLS from top to bottom? Expansion next year and in 2012 is going to thin out the middle class talent, and replenishing that pool will require more than hoping you find a prodigy on your doorstep. Najar and Hamid are exceptions to the rule; there’s a reason most players pulled up from academies to MLS clubs are largely unknown.

In the meantime, MLS clubs have to do a better job of finding talent if the league as a whole wants to continue to move forward on the field like it is off the field. New markets and big crowds in those markets are great, but that shouldn’t be our only goal. Right now, I see little evidence that anyone at MLS HQ is particularly bothered by the fact that the league has, at best, stagnated in terms of overall quality on the field.

So, what’s the fix? One good idea that has been proposed in a bunch of places would be a central MLS scouting network, since clubs apparently are unwilling to put up the money to have their own scouting departments. This won’t cost that much and would probably help teams league-wide make better use of their limited funds. It would also be nice to bring back the reserve league, but if I’m complaining about adding 3 24-man rosters, then surely I’d also have to complain about expanding rosters league-wide, right? Plus, that’s a costly move. Even if we’re just talking about adding 4 or 5 guys on the league minimum, that’s between $3 million and $3.8 million league-wide (not to mention the other costs of running the reserve league).

I guess my main point is that GMs league-wide need to do a better job, and they probably need some help. If MLS won’t provide a central scouting service like the NHL has, then clubs should step forward and do it on their own. Surely if NY is willing to pay Angel and Henry millions, they can pony up a hundred thou to have 2 full-time scouts. If the off-season rumors in the press that had United as part of the group of teams pushing for more DPs were true, then I would guess that we can afford to hire at least one actual scout instead of having to ship Kasper or Ashton to wherever (leaving the rest of their jobs essentially undone while they’re away).