Eh, I felt like Pirlo was onto a different line than most people who read the article, when I looked over it. Most people seem to take the line, rightly or wrongly, that in order for MLS to succeed/become a top league/establish itself as a major US sport (delete as applicable) then the primary factor is the standard of play, and as such all arguments revolve around all facets of this, such as how to keep the teams competitive, whether relegation is needed to make sure teams at the bottom keep fighting etc.
Thing is, that's not really the question that Pirlo was asked, and it's certainly not the one he chose to answer. He was addressing the question of what MLS needs to do to compete with China, and he naturally framed it from a very player-centric POV. The issue Pirlo was addressing was not any sort of question over whether MLS needed to be more competitive or higher-level - I don't think anyone here would argue that Chinese football is far better than that in the US - it was what MLS needs to do to compete with the way that China is suddenly absorbing vast quantities of top playing talent and is reaping the benefits of massive exposure with that.
Sure, he could still have chosen to answer the question by saying that MLS is innately a better league because of its structure, and that keeping said structure will ultimately render it victorious, but that's not the angle he sees the leagues at, and when you look at it from his angle - i.e. making the question "what does MLS need to do to attract the players who are instead choosing to go to China?" then his comments make a lot more sense.
