Actually, no. It would be a short argument.
The difference is that in this country, private individuals and not the government has created the soccer league, and it's developed ties with media companies not affiliated with the government. In China, any and all "private" money is actually just an extension of the government's tentacles by way of "The Party" - none of those rich Chinese would have ever achieved their positions without sucking at the power teat of the regime; and in turn, the media companies of China are state-owned/sponsored, so anything they throw to the league is one-degree removed from coming straight from the government coffers.
For the US to be in a similar position, it would be like PBS sponsoring MLS with a $200M broadcast contract. If that happened, then yes, one could argue that there are people in this country that could better use the money, which is what the case is in China. However since the MLS owners and ESPN are not government sponsored, the similarities aren't valid.