Something of a panic has broken out among a large segment of United States men's national team fans.

Now that the transfers of Mix Diskerud and Jozy Altidore to Major League Soccer are done – or practically done in the case of Altidore, who still has to be forcibly allocated to his apparent destination Toronto FC in some heavy-handed way – 13 of the 23 men Jurgen Klinsmann took to last summer's World Cup play in North America's domestic league, up from 10 at the time of the tournament. That reality is inducing a fair bit of anxiety amongst the many who concern themselves with the USMNT's fate.

On the eve of MLS's 20th season, fans remain deeply suspicious of the upstart league, which has made immense strides but inarguably still lags behind its European brethren on the field. So, for now, does its popularity. If the soccer in Europe is better, it follows in the reasoning of those apprehensive fans that an American playing in Europe rather than at home is also better. But that just isn't necessarily so.

Some call it insecurity, others point to self-loathing. But essentially, this misconception boils down to the evolution of the national team and its gradual weaning of domestically sourced players.

[FC Yahoo: Chris Wondolowski admits World Cup miss against Belgium still 'haunts' him]

The USA has been to 10 World Cups. In the very first edition in 1930, when the Americans reached the semifinals (still their best-ever performance), all 16 of their squad members played at home for such clubs as the Providence Gold Bugs, Philadelphia Cricket Club and Detroit Holley Carburetor. The same was true in 1934 and 1950. When they finally made it back in 1990, 18 of 22 Americans played at home, for colleges and semi-pro teams. By 1994, seven players were active abroad with the other 15 contracted to the United States Soccer Federation full-time.

In 1998, the first World Cup after MLS kicked off two years earlier, 16 of the 22 U.S. players were active at home. In 2002 – America's modern high-water mark with a quarterfinal run – and 2006, the number fell to 11. In 2010, Bob Bradley took just four MLSers to South Africa, and that was seen as a sign of progress. Which is why it was jarring to so many that Klinsmann selected 10 American-based players (or Canadian-based in Michael Bradley's case) for Brazil.

[FC Yahoo: Jozy Altidore reportedly leaving Sunderland for Toronto FC]

Klinsmann's confusing statements that all players should seek the best possible clubs in Europe while he increasingly built around the ones employed in MLS didn't help. But the view that playing in Europe trumps all is misguided. The bulk of the national team playing at home is a sign of maturation of both the league and the sport in America. It's a function, primarily, of MLS's demonstrated and long-overdue willingness to pay the same kind of multi-million dollar salaries to big-time USA players as aging Europeans of fading skills.

The league office and its clubs have gone well out of their way to find ways to retain or return national teamers, whether by massaging their Byzantine rulebook of allocations and drafts and discovery claims and designated players, or by plainly strong-arming their own system to land a player. Bradley and national team captain Clint Dempsey, for instance, were simply delivered to their destination of choice, bypassing the process entirely, even though the league – and therefore rival teams – would be paying part of Dempsey's salary.

A new collective bargaining agreement, currently being negotiated by the league and the players union, might only serve to strengthen that effect, as payrolls are expected to rise and a fourth designated player slot (per team) is apparently also being discussed.

[FC Yahoo: Mix Diskerud joins New York City FC as non-Designated Player]

And if we really must look over to Europe for our guiding principles, all this must be lauded. The English, while far from the most talented soccer players in the world, almost all play domestically because that's where they are compensated the best removing the urge to leave. The Russian league, newly flush with disposable cash from its energy oligarchs, has brought back its entire national team – not a single one of its players at the 2014 World Cup was employed abroad. (In 2002, at its last appearance on the world stage, Russia had nine players stationed abroad.) And the English and Russian Premier League are better for it.

The Spanish, for their part, didn't start leaving Spain for England until a big gap in salaries opened up between the clubs in the two countries – for those who don't play for Real Madrid and Barcelona, at least. By and large, a soccer player's decision to play abroad is a financially motivated one. For Americans, there was historically an aspirational aspect to it as well, but not one that couldn't be bought out for the right sum, as it turns out.

Yet the eagerness of his players to return stateside has occasionally drawn Klinsmann's ire. While speaking of Dempsey and Bradley, the coach said that it would be "very difficult for them to keep the same level." That sneer in turn aggravated MLS commissioner Don Garber, who ranted that Klinsmann's comments were detrimental. This week, Klinsmann backed off his anti-MLS edict somewhat, telling Sports Illustrated that it was the right solution for some players but not others. He okayed Diskerud's signing with New York City FC, for instance, but insists Altidore could succeed in a major European league even though there is scant evidence to support that claim.

[FC Yahoo: For Klinsmann and USMNT, 2015 should be a year of change]

In the end, every U.S. national teamer playing at home has a higher net benefit to the American gain than one playing abroad. He doesn't just represent an opportunity for the league to reposition its image as one where players are keen to stay during their primes, rather than glide into retirement, but also can conspire to have a larger overall impact. With far more USMNTers around, young players in the clubs' first teams and even academies benefit from better examples and higher standards. Over time, these players will raise the playing level of the league with their play as well as their influence.

If Klinsmann is burdened with a short-term sacrifice in having to tolerate lesser competition for his players – which also assures them of more playing time, by the way, which has all too often proven scarce in Europe – the long-term payoff of creating a better talent incubator is potentially huge. This is a consideration Klinsmann should make now that he is no longer just the national team head coach, but also the federation's technical director entrusted with the future of the program.

It must also be noted here that MLS is an uncommonly demanding league, with the extreme weather, extensive travel and physical play conspiring to tax players throughout the season. Those challenges do rather a good job of simulating conditions at the World Cup, the end game in all of this. Better than just about any other league in the world, in fact.

Leander Schaerlaeckens is a soccer columnist for Yahoo Sports. Follow him on Twitter @LeanderAlphabet.