PDA

View Full Version : Dear MLS Players Union, it's time for a deal



Boris
01-05-2010, 11:18 PM
http://www.torontosun.com/sports/soccer/2010/01/05/12357281-qmi.html

very interesting read. I for one have been following this story very closely with phil. Just to let everyone know, we HAVE been following the developments to this story :D.

We have had several conversations regarding the CBA and what this could mean to the future of the MLS. There are several scenarios available.

I will continue to follow this story. Within the next few days we will unveil an initiative that we've been working on since the autumn. For now, enjoy this article and lets get some good discussion regarding the Collective Bargaining Agreement which goes up on January 31st.




Attention: Bob Foose, executive director, MLS Players Union.

Dear Bob: Hi, it’s Steve here. I’ve left a bunch of messages with you at the union office, but your line is that you’re not talking about your contract talks with the league at the moment.

Fair enough.

Cashcleaner
01-05-2010, 11:35 PM
I believe that MLS will one day be a major player on the North American sports scene. But, right now, at this fledgling stage, is not the right time to play hardball in labour negotiations.

But why does it have to be the player's union that accepts any concessions? The league has all to lose when it comes to the possibility of a strike/lockout situation. MLS has the ball in their court and if they had any smarts, they would acknowledge the fact that the players have the moral high-ground this time.

The will of the fans will decide which way this labour dispute turns out, and we have the backs of the players.

ag futbol
01-05-2010, 11:42 PM
Steven Goff has a bit of a story on it as well: http://voices.washingtonpost.com/soccerinsider/

Time for this thing to cool down a bit. If the league locks the players they are shooting themselves in the face. It seems like the old guard is driving the agenda here and Garber is stuck in permanent depression economics mode.

I'd also point out that A LOT of the things the players are asking for don't actually involve any more money. The league needs to realize it's not a monopoly, and the end effect of a lot of these regulations is that it is losing talent to 4th rate european leagues (that would gladly sign here if movement was easier).

nascarguy
01-05-2010, 11:48 PM
yeah The league has the most to lose the players will just find work oversea

ag futbol
01-06-2010, 12:00 AM
But why does it have to be the player's union that accepts any concessions? The league has all to lose when it comes to the possibility of a strike/lockout situation. MLS has the ball in their court and if they had any smarts, they would acknowledge the fact that the players have the moral high-ground this time.

The will of the fans will decide which way this labour dispute turns out, and we have the backs of the players.
I agree, that's completely ignoring the fact last negotiations MLSPU made huge concessions to help pull this thing together. So now the union should just take it in the ass for this round while MLS has seen a relatively huge rebound in fortune?

While the conditions of the economy are bad, in general the climate for soccer has never been better. What if this were to fade away? MLS might be on a situation where it's missed it's big chance to grow and the "easy does it" model might not work either.

What the MLS is asking for goes beyond conservatism and is extremely stingy. The franchise fees, the stadiums, the money spent on "dp" players, all of it will be wasted investment unless they can get the quality across the field up to a better level.

Cashcleaner
01-06-2010, 12:11 AM
^ Exactly. The commish and owners can argue all they want about the state of the global economy, but it deosn't mean shit when the popularity of the sport and league is growing the way it is. MLS is making a lot of money. A metric assload in some regions. But if they don't want to share in the wealth, the fans will readily acknowledge who is to blame if labour talks stall.

Waggy
01-06-2010, 12:30 AM
I'm still under a self-banning from posting on this site, but I have to weigh in on this:

MLS isn't doing some "conservative" thing here. MLS is a single entity. It isn't 19 franchises. The 3 succesful ones can't prop up the rest of the clubs. I don't know what MLS's budget looks like, but I'm willing to wager a very large sum of money that MLS as a whole lost CONSIDERABLE money last year. And last year had to easilly be the best year they've ever had. (Note, by considerable, I mean well into the tens of millions range, if not more).

Why should (and more importantly why would) the owners continue to lose money hand over fist to make it more fair for the players to play? I agree that the MLS players as a whole get jobbed, but they knew the deal coming in. Things have to progress slowly. Remember the labour movement took decades of work to progress, not 15 years. It was the mid 1800's until, hell, probably the 1970's. You can't rush these things. Once the MLS is financially stable, it can break the clubs into their own entities, then TFC will be able to pay a 15 million dollar transfer fee for who-ever they like. But that day isn't now.

The point is: if the MLS goes away this summer, there is a very real possibility they won't come back. Ever. The NHL STILL doesn't have a TV deal in the states and it's "Stronger than ever". The NHL was on ESPN before their lockout too. And the NHL had almost 100 years of history on their side. And the NHL had Canada and the Northern States to prop them up till they got back on their feet. You think TFC and Drew Carey are going to pay to prop up an entire league? Really?

A year is a lifetime in marketing. Especially in a World Cup year, especially when the US team seems like it has a chance to be competitive and get the world talking about MLS. The cold hard fact is MLS isn't ready for the changes it needs to make. So the options are either suffer short term, or say fuck it and hope things work out for the best, that some benevolent owners will come in to prop up the failed franchises. You think MLSE will be happy they just spent $12 million on BMO field only to watch it sit empty all summer? You think they'll be only too happy to do that again? Really? And MLSE is one of the better owners in the sport. What the hell is Philly going to do, with a brand new stadium and no way to pay for it? What about what the teams will do if the players seek employment somewhere else and decide to not come back?

More importantly, what will we all do if the fans don't come back? Get behind the new Toronto NASL team? Start back at square one? Thats the risk that the article is talking about, for a reward of what? Not waiting 2 or 3 years to get the same end result anyways? I know we live in an impatient society but that's a ridiculously large risk for some immediate gratification.

/end rant, back to self imposed exile. See you all in the spring

Cashcleaner
01-06-2010, 01:28 AM
^ What you have to realize is the fact that in the grand scheme of thing, player salaries are some of the lesser expenses these clubs have to deal with. Consider staffing expenditures, stadia rent/lease, and other ancillary costs. Playuer salary can directly translate to the overall level of talent a club has and that in turn can translate to the level of incoming revenue, yet the price tag attached to most players in minuscule compared to the rest of the operating costs of a club and the league as a whole.

ensco
01-06-2010, 07:49 AM
The "single entity" system is not exactly what it sounds like. I don't think MLS' legal position is one I would bet the farm on.

Notwithstanding that the MLS takes the position that it is one entity, any quick look at how revenues are shared will prove that each owner is mostly dependent on how its franchise does in its home gate, and the performance of the players its management acquires, in terms of its financial performance. The "owners" may only own shares in the league, but the way the money flows, it looks a lot more like multiple teams in a traditional structure. It's a legal construct by MLS, designed to skirt US antitrust law.

There was one court challenge to the single entity system. It was in 2000 and was filed by 8 players acting alone, not the union. A district judge threw out the case because he ruled that the league's "single entity" system wasn't "restraint of trade" because that statute narrowly requires that "two or more parties" must conspire for there to be restraint of trade.

I'm no lawyer, but I think that judge got that wrong and that cased could be re-filed. I'm basing this on what is going on with tax shelters in the US. There are literally hundreds of tax shelters from the 1980s and 1990s that have been invalidated in the last couple of years by the US courts, even though they conform to "the letter of the law", because the actual intent of the structure is only to circumvent the law. That's what the MLS structure feels like to me.

Also a court challenge would be a lot stronger if filed by the union, and not just a few players.

Furthermore, I've had business experience with the US Labor Relations Board. I think a filing at the USNLRB, which has become much more activist under the Obama administration, could be very interesting.

The real question is, do the players have the millions it takes to "lawyer up" for this? I'm not sure.

OneLoveOneEric
01-06-2010, 08:02 AM
I'm almost never on the side of the players in this sort of thing, but these guys aren't the pro athletes we're used to in North America. Anyone read The Beckham Experiment? Most of these guys share apartments and ride bikes to training.
I can't imagine their pitiful salaries are the problem.

Hitcho
01-06-2010, 09:22 AM
I'm not sure I fully understand all the issues in this (or that most people do, because I imagine there's a lot going on behind the scenes that isn't being made public). However, my gut tells me that one way or another this thing will get sorted out before the deadline, even if it's an 11th hour emergency compromise that only lasts for a year and the whole thing is basically just postponed.

Why? Because the bottom line is that everyone stands to get fucked if MLS folds or even goes backwards. The league goes under. The owners lose their investments (pretty significant in some cases). The players are out of work and only the cream of MLS players could seriously hope to jump into another decent job abroad - a lot of players would not want to leave their families etc for a 4th rate league overseas even if they could. The TV companies, sponsors and investors all lose money. The fans lose their league.

And with the history of soccer in Namerica, it would take something quite miraculous for MLS going under not to be the final nail in the coffin of pro-soccer on this continent.

So, one way or another, a deal will be struck on some terms, however flimsy, to get the league operating next season. Because ultimately, that's what every single party both at the table and looking on with interest wants and needs to happen.

tlear
01-06-2010, 09:35 AM
Oh they can mount a court challenge.. lockout the league etc. All this will accomplish is: 1. kill the league 2. make vast majority of MLS mid/low level players unemployed.

MLS is not the monopoly here.. player if he is good enough can pick his stuff and go play for some second division Russian team in the middle of Siberia. League is stuck with unionized players (monopoly on supply side)

Some of the teams are in decent state and a couple in a good state, but league as whole is very far from being a business that union can milk. I also think they are not dumb and realize that, there will be an agreement before the deadline

Redcoe15
01-06-2010, 09:38 AM
It's kind of hard for MLS to insist it's struggling when they've been adding teams to the league for years, and continue to do so.

Detroit_TFC
01-06-2010, 10:04 AM
IMHO MLS is a more complex organization than is stated generally. MLS, on the operational end, does probably lose a lot of money. However, when you factor in Soccer United Marketing, none of the investors are going hungry. The league wants to have a contract that helps their operations be more profitable. The players can see there is a lot of money available to the league to fund a better CBA.

Meanwhile, some aspects of single entity are undergoing a legal challenge at the US Supreme Court in American Needle v NFL. If the court rules as expected there shouldn't be any real changes to single entity. However if they come out with an unexpected interpretation, it could effect MLS.
http://www.scotuswiki.com/index.php?title=American_Needle_Inc._v._NFL,_et_al

keem-o-sabi
01-06-2010, 10:11 AM
Good article from Soccer America http://www.socceramerica.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=Articles.san&s=36171&Nid=109537&p=386618

I have posted a little bit of it here

FIFPro's latest salvo: fact and fiction
by Ridge Mahoney, Wednesday, Jan 6, 2010 7:00 AM ET
[MLS] Stalemated in its efforts to spark momentum in the Collective Bargaining Agreement negotiations with MLS, the players' union is rallying more support overseas. FIFPro, the international players' union, has fired another salvo to apply pressure on MLS as well as FIFA. Without taking sides, Soccer America is presenting FIFPro's statement in its entirety in italics, along with clarifications or counterpoints marked in bold letters following each issue of contention.

FIFPRO: Negotiations between Major League Soccer and its players on a new collective bargaining agreement have reached a critical juncture. The current agreement in place expires on January 31, but despite months of negotiations the two sides have made little progress on a new deal.

The league is now threatening to lock the players out on February 1 (effectively shutting down the league) if the players don't agree to a continuation of the status quo.

The primary point of contention is the league's unique system, which differs substantially from other leagues around the world and violates FIFA regulations in several respects. Thus, for example:

• Player contracts are routinely terminated by the league during their term, as almost 80 percent of players in MLS do not have guaranteed contracts;

SA: The percentage is not known, but most MLS deals are guaranteed only for the first year and a portion of the second, after which option years kick in. Guaranteed money, not just the higher salaries, helps propel American players to smaller European leagues like those in Scandinavia where the vast majority of contracts are guaranteed for their full duration or at least three years if a longer-term deal. Those that are terminated before their completion of their guaranteed term are usually done so only in cases of extreme player misbehavior or by mutual consent.

• MLS operates as a cartel in that every player's contract must be entered into with the league instead of his club;

SA: The MLS single-entity system is certainly different, but has also been used in other U.S. leagues and been upheld in U.S. courts, which is one reason FIFA is staying quiet on this dispute.

• The contract of virtually every player in the league contains multiple unilateral one-year options that may only be exercised by the league;

I didn't want to post the whole thing here. So it makes a good read though.

ensco
01-06-2010, 11:02 AM
Oh they can mount a court challenge.. lockout the league etc. All this will accomplish is: 1. kill the league 2. make vast majority of MLS mid/low level players unemployed.

MLS is not the monopoly here.. player if he is good enough can pick his stuff and go play for some second division Russian team in the middle of Siberia. League is stuck with unionized players (monopoly on supply side)

Some of the teams are in decent state and a couple in a good state, but league as whole is very far from being a business that union can milk. I also think they are not dumb and realize that, there will be an agreement before the deadline

1) You don't think some form of MLS-like soccer would re-appear if MLS folded? I think it wouldn't take two minutes.

2) Your interpretation of monopoly law is unique. I don't think courts ever take the view that national boundaries don't matter. Most of the guys in MLS (and in most industries) cannot get jobs outside the US/Canada because they can't get a work visa.

drewski
01-06-2010, 11:21 AM
But why does it have to be the player's union that accepts any concessions? The league has all to lose when it comes to the possibility of a strike/lockout situation. MLS has the ball in their court and if they had any smarts, they would acknowledge the fact that the players have the moral high-ground this time.

The will of the fans will decide which way this labour dispute turns out, and we have the backs of the players.

league might have all to lose, but the owners don't and thats they key. they have plenty of other investments and will survive regardless. On teh other hand, the players don't have any real fallback option and the owners know this and can force them on it.

Yohan
01-06-2010, 01:56 PM
It's kind of hard for MLS to insist it's struggling when they've been adding teams to the league for years, and continue to do so.
you're struggling when the league as whole is not making profit...

TOBOR !
01-06-2010, 02:15 PM
I wonder how this might affect the NASL/USL sanctioning situation... just saying.

ensco
01-07-2010, 08:27 AM
Within the next few days we will unveil an initiative that we've been working on since the autumn. For now, enjoy this article and lets get some good discussion regarding the Collective Bargaining Agreement which goes up on January 31st.

I can't stand the tension created by waiting to see what you have in mind! :)

London
01-18-2010, 11:25 PM
any cba news?

Nuvinho
01-19-2010, 12:05 AM
My 2 cents...on salaries (I know there are more issues the players are worried about):

Raise the cap to $2.5M (only a $200,000 raise)
Do not count the DP $400,000 salary
That opens up $600,000 more.

4 Developmental players contracts (min. $30K - max. $50K)
20 Senior team players (min. $50K)
If you work it out and you pay the developmental players the max $50K, then the average senior player is around $115K. However, if you have DP, then the average goes up to $121K.

that's my take on the salaries.

Macksam
01-21-2010, 06:33 PM
If the MLS folds, all the pro Canadian-domestic league supporters would be happy.

jabbronies
01-21-2010, 07:18 PM
If the MLS folds, all the pro Canadian-domestic league supporters would be happy.

all 300 of them.

and then it'll be just like the early 90's for Soccer in Canada.