Following the FIFA World Cup, MLS ran an ad campaign that cheekily opined, "Thanks, world. We'll take it from here." The idea was that those still needing a soccer fix could get it in the form of Major League Soccer.
At which point, reality socked the league in the nose.
This week's quarterfinals in the Leagues Cup witnessed four MLS teams squaring off against four of their Liga MX counterparts. The teams from south of the border prevailed in every instance. It was as if the Mexican teams were saying, "No, no, no. We will take it from here."
It makes for an embarrassing outcome for MLS. This is a competition that is supposed to tap into the best aspects of the U.S.-Mexico soccer rivalry. Instead, what's left is more evidence that MLS still has some catching up to do in terms of competitiveness.
Liga MX teams have won 20 of the past 21 Concacaf Champions Cups. Only the Seattle Sounders' triumph in 2022 has interrupted an otherwise clean sweep. The excuse in that competition is that the different calendars make it harder to compete, considering MLS teams are just starting their season, but the results from this week reveal that argument is a smokescreen designed to obscure the gap in quality between the two leagues.
Has MLS improved over the years? Definitely, but there is still so much more to do.
MLS will point out that the 2025 Leagues Cup witnessed the opposite outcome. During that edition's quarterfinal stage, it was four MLS teams prevailing over Liga MX sides, but looking under the tournament's hood reveals some important context.
In 2025, all four quarterfinals were played in the home venue of the MLS team, providing a significant home-field advantage. Even then, two of those quarterfinals were decided by penalties. Had the soccer gods seen fit to shine their benevolent light on the Liga MX sides, the results suddenly look very different. Regardless, the MLS performances weren't as dominant as might first appear.
In 2026, the vast majority of matches during the league phase were home games for the MLS teams, with just four matches either held in Mexico or at neutral venues in the U.S. The record for MLS teams during that phase was 28W-19L-7D. Successful, yes, but hardly dominant.
That advantage changed in the quarterfinals, where three of the four matches were played at neutral venues. The lone exception was the Chicago Fire, and even in that case they were forced to play Monterrey at SeatGeek Stadium in suburban Bridgeview, Illinois, rather than their usual home of Soldier Field, and lost 2-1. That negating of homefield advantage was apparently enough for the Liga MX teams to gain the upper hand.
Even worse is the fact that two of the quarterfinals were sparsely attended, with Toluca and Austin FC in Harrison, New Jersey, and Real Salt Lake and León in Commerce City, Colorado, each drawing less than 10,000 fans. The América vs. Columbus Crew matchup at Dignity Health Sports Park in Carson, California, drew an announced crowd of 20,637, but the upper deck was mostly empty. And getting fans in Southern California to show up when América is on the bill is the ticket-selling equivalent of an absolute sitter.
All of this points to the Leagues Cup being fundamentally broken.
The concept, on a certain level, make sense. There is money to be made from tapping into the U.S.-Mexico soccer rivalry. MLS also needed to provide broadcasters content that it controls. But the format make little sense from a competition standpoint.
During the league phase, MLS teams are in one table with Liga MX teams in another, but MLS teams never square off against each other. They only play matches against Liga MX sides and vice versa. The whole point of having a table is that you are competing directly against the teams you're grouped with.
This approach introduces a level of variability that makes it difficult for the best teams to emerge. Of the four MLS quarterfinalists, only Chicago is in the top half of its conference standings, with RSL in eighth. Austin is dead last in the Western Conference and Columbus is second bottom in the East. While the MLS teams deserve credit for getting the results they needed in the league phase, it's not a surprise to see them fall in the quarters against quality teams when most of them are forced to play outside their home area.
One also gets the sense that the U.S.-Mexico soccer rivalry is reaching a level of saturation that causes the law of diminishing returns to kick in. Sure, on Oct. 3, the two countries' national teams will square off and the game in suburban Phoenix will likely sell out. Igniting similar levels of passion at club level requires a level of organic growth that can be difficult to harness. There's no ignoring the fact that the crowd in Harrison and Commerce City made for terrible optics.
The incarnation of the Leagues Cup that started in 2024 came along at an opportune time. Lionel Messi had just joined Inter Miami and everyone wanted a ticket to the Messi Circus. But over time, novelty fades. The reality is that unless Messi is playing, the Leagues Cup is turning into the U.S. Open Cup in terms of attention, minus the USOC's 111-year history or the charm of the David vs. Goliath matchups that dot its bracket every year.
Can the Leagues Cup be fixed? A better format would help. Better venues would, too. But perhaps a better question is: Does anyone want the competition to be fixed? The calendar is crowded. Some teams prioritize the Leagues Cup, while others don't, preferring to focus on league play. The fact that MLS is changing its calendar to a summer/spring format might change that dynamic if the tournament takes place at the beginning of the season rather than smack in the middle. The impetus to start strong might see more teams take it seriously.
Regardless, unless changes are made, the Leagues Cup will slide further into irrelevance.