Juan Gerardo Ruelas Jr.

This man is a literal embodiment of what the founding fathers stood for. Gun control has racist roots. Californians who support any and all types of gun control are participating in a centuries old tradition of racism and bigotry.

Post 2026 World Cup final, with Spain as the winner, it is clear that there is a correlation between the total number of pro soccer players in a country and the respective prowess/power ranking of that country. Until the USA increases their offerings by roughly 10 times, and has a system to move clubs up and down the pyramid, we aren’t ever going to be close enough to be considered amongst the greatest.

@BrianNorgard Yes, more colonialism. Great idea.

The next Louisiana Purchase? Here’s an idea: the United States acquires the Baja California Peninsula from Mexico for $1 to $5 trillion. Every Mexican citizen living in Baja receives dual U.S.-Mexico citizenship, plus a $50,000 investment account. Then America gets to work: world-class infrastructure, deep-water ports, desalination, nuclear energy, housing, universities, and industry. Tijuana and Mexicali could become major reindustrialization zones. In return, the United States gains nearly 1,800 miles of some of the most spectacular coastline on Earth and the chance to build the great new economic region. Is this a crazy idea? Of course. But so was the Louisiana Purchase in 1803.

@THEChrisKessell @Hitchnewbiz @USLLeagueTwo @NPSLSoccer @TheLeague_fC @UPSLsoccer @LaredoHeatSC @fuego_futbol owns their own facility as well.

How many @USLLeagueTwo, @NPSLSoccer, @TheLeague_fC, @UPSLsoccer, etc level teams play in soccer specific venues as the primary tenants? Whether they own or rent.. I don't care. Just they are the primary team that plays there. I saw @Hitchnewbiz saying @laredoheatsc own one.

This is a great argument for salary caps and financial fair play so clubs run responsibly and within their means. Arguing that the system shouldn’t exist at all is the rotten logic that screams: “we should ban entrepreneurship because most businesses fail” or “people might abuse freedom, so let’s eliminate freedom” Debt is a governance problem. Competition is a market structure. Confusing the two shows why should remain silent on this issue.

"Pro/rel doesn't save bad businesses." Correct. Concluding that the underlying structure has no effect on whether clubs become viable? That's delusional. A ladder doesn't guarantee you'll climb. Removing the ladder guarantees you won't.

The Eastern Columbia art deco masterpiece that mogs the modern LA skyline was built in 9 months during the Great Depression. Down the street, the Graffiti Towers have been under construction for the last 11 years. Don’t let communists run your city.

Good! I have a lot of respect for anyone willing to call a spade a spade and confront FIFA’s favoritism. Now please apply that same standard to the decisions made by our own federation that clearly favor certain leagues and stakeholders over others. If you have the courage to call out FIFA, have the courage to call out your @ussoccer colleagues as well. Otherwise, it is not principle. It is selective outrage.

@puckhead48e Buddy, you appear to have taken national totals and labeled them “per million.” Your math gives America 12 million professional athletes.

@ChannelJuanNews Millionaires per million: US: ~71,500 FRA: ~37,300 UK: ~35,900 ITA: ~21,000 SPN: ~22,900 MEX: ~2,600 TUR: ~1,100 ARG: ? Pro athletes per million (est): US: ~35,350 FRA: ~7,500 UK: ~ 12,800 ITA: ~6,800 SPN: ~11,000 MEX: ~11,200 TUR: ~5,500 ARG: ~4,900

Professional players per million people: 🇪🇸 Spain: 175 🏴 England: 98 🇲🇽 Mexico: 72 🇦🇷 Argentina: 79 🇹🇷 Turkey: 46 🇮🇹 Italy: 53 🇫🇷 France: 43 🇺🇸 United States: 8 Apparently America is only the biggest country in the world when it’s convenient for the argument.

I think that's the core issue, that the elected leaders of our @ussoccer federation do not have public stances on what is likely the most important structural change that could change the entire trajectory of the sport in our country. Yet, there is no public knowledge of their stance. Why?

@ElonsBlueCheck @ussoccer @natgoldc Which part of his comment do you disagree with? The article doesn’t mention promotion and relegation, so I’m not sure why you are bringing that up. I don’t know what @natgoldc’s position is on the #ProRelForUSA issue.

Wow! It’s pretty huge for the sitting vice president of @ussoccer to come out and write an article like this, condemning the FIFA’s handling of the Balogun Red Card among other issues. That takes a lot of courage. I don’t agree with everything @natgoldc says, but I agree with a lot of it and you have my respect. 👏👏👏

Every league has its flaws, but you have to admit this is exciting. It may end up being the most significant innovation in American soccer since the modern game took root here. Debate the details all you want, but the big-picture vision is genuinely compelling. Now let’s hope the execution lives up to the idea.

“But what about the $500 million investment?” The same people concerned about pro/rel risk are ignoring the fact that those same investors are buying clubs in open pyramids every year. Apparently, their money can survive promotion and relegation everywhere except America.

Even when investors believe a club is relatively “relegation-proof,” they are still investing in a system where sporting failure carries consequences. They assess the risk, price it accordingly, and invest. They do not demand that the entire pyramid remain closed forever just to protect their valuation. And agreed, pro/rel is not a magic pill or silver bullet. It would introduce an entirely new set of challenges that American soccer would have to address honestly and responsibly, most of these we haven't even broached because we aren't in this system yet. But even if the eventual solution is some kind of franken system, modified for the realities of the United States, it should still reward sporting merit, create meaningful upward mobility (pro/rel), and embrace FIFA’s core development mechanisms, including solidarity payments and training compensation.

The gun shop analogy completely misses the argument. Nobody said every business model works identically everywhere. The point is that MLS owners happily put their own money into open pyramids abroad while denying American clubs access to the same competitive system at home. A current conservative count shows that 10 of MLS’s 30 clubs have ownership links to foreign professional clubs. Owners connected to Inter Miami, LAFC, NYCFC and the New York Red Bulls currently hold stakes in at least six foreign second or third division clubs. So clearly they do not believe open pyramids are uninvestable. They believe they should have access to them while American challengers do not. This is the core issue. Open markets for them abroad, closed markets for everyone else at home.

@Neil_Bloch This is a great argument for what the USA is really good at, which is Salary caps.

@ChannelJuanNews The EPL spends about $300 mil per season on parachute payments which only covers part of the waste. If you’re looking for financial incompetence, a good place to start is spending that level of money to shuffle bottom teams who’ll never contended.

Imagine looking at decades of debt, insolvency, and financial mismanagement and deciding, “yep, pro/rel did this.” That’s like blaming gravity for a plane crash instead of the failed engine. Clubs have gone bankrupt in open leagues. Clubs have gone bankrupt in closed leagues. The common denominator isn’t promotion and relegation, it’s financial incompetence.

Real American soccer exceptionalism would mean building the greatest player-development pipeline on Earth by opening the pyramid to everyone. And I mean everyone. Entrepreneurs, investors, educators, technologists, community organizations, and leaders from soccer-adjacent sports should all have the opportunity to enter the market, build clubs, develop players, and compete. America’s greatest advantage is not centralized control. It is our ability to attract talent, capital, and ideas from everywhere. That is how Silicon Valley changed the world. It did not ask incumbents for permission. It opened the door to ambitious people with better ideas and let competition determine who succeeded. Open the pyramid. Stop gatekeeping. Let the market decide.

American owners happily invest in open pyramids across England, Wales, Spain, and Belgium. But bring that same system home, and suddenly competition is too dangerous? America is supposed to be the land of the free and the home of the brave, not the land of closed markets and protected incumbents.

@CapitanColombia I am not arguing that "American exceptionalism" is the sole reason behind those accomplishments. I am saying that when this country truly decides to accomplish something, it fucking gets done. The only thing missing is the decision.

@ChannelJuanNews “We invented“🤭

I am routinely shocked when debating with people who are so convinced that it is impossible to do X or Y thing in the USA. We are the nation that went to the moon, we created reusable rockets, we invented the internet. BUT SOMEHOW when it comes to the least difficult industry, sports, it is all of a sudden IMPOSSIBLE to do X or Y or Z thing. NEVERMIND that we created the atomic bomb in a period of time that leading academics dismissed it as being achievable. NEVERMIND that we came up with a cured for a pandemic level virus (Covid) in a record amount of time. But all of a sudden, creating a system that is equitable for everyone and is open, yeah no, that’s just IMPOSSIBLE. Truly, all of this pessimism from half assed sports fans makes me feel like we are just wanting to accept the status quo. We want to be mediocre.

The issue isn’t X league versus Y league. It’s governance. When the same people who profit from the rules are also responsible for writing, interpreting, and enforcing them, those rules deserve scrutiny. That’s why banking, telecommunications, energy, and virtually every major industry rely on independent oversight. We recognize that conflicts of interest distort incentives. Why should soccer be the one industry where self-regulation is considered good governance? The moment the referee has a financial stake in the outcome, regulation begins to look more like market protection. Just look at the composition of the @ussoccer Board. Many of the stakeholders being regulated also have a voice in the governance of the federation. Even if everyone acts in good faith, that structure creates an inherent conflict of interest and undermines public confidence in the impartiality of the system. That is precisely why competition matters. Competition requires open markets, transparent rules, and independent oversight. Self-regulation tends to protect incumbents. Open competition rewards those who create the most value. The recent @naslofficial antitrust litigation, although ultimately dismissed, brought allegations of coordination and exclusionary conduct into public view. The court did not find liability, but the fact that these questions could be credibly raised at all should give people pause. At a minimum, the appearance of conflicts of interest at the highest levels of American soccer should prompt us to ask whether the governance structure truly serves the game or the institutions that already control it. Good governance is not built on trusting the people in power. It’s built on ensuring no one has to