Dust2
02-20-2010, 04:16 AM
Garber:
[t]here are a number of camps that exist within any league structure, and my role is to ensure that we can reach consensus on a plan going forward that makes sense for everybody.”http://www.sportsbusinessjournal.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=article.main&articleId=57143&requestTimeout=900
Owner-operators weighed two options for player salaries for 2008 during the meeting. The first would see the salary cap rise to $2.3 million a team, while a second would see it increase to around $2.5 million.
No owner-operators were willing to comment on the record about the vote because Commissioner Don Garber threatened to fine anyone who spoke about it.
Sources familiar with the discussion said the Kraft family (owners of the New England Revolution) and Hunt Sports Group (FC Dallas and Columbus Crew) favored a modest increase in the salary cap consistent with previous years’ growth of 4 to 5 percent, while New York Red Bulls representatives favored pushing it beyond $2.5 million per team.
The debate reflected a philosophical divide between the two groups as the young league continues to wrestle with when and how to spend on players. Traditionally, the Kraft and Hunt contingents have favored controlling player costs and minimizing expenses to foster steady league growth, while AEG (Los Angeles Galaxy and Houston Dynamo), Chivas (Chivas USA) and Red Bull have favored spending more on players to improve the quality of play and increase interest in the league.
League executives reached consensus by putting forward a proposal that would see the salary cap rise 4 percent, allowing teams that wanted to spend more the ability to do so, but not at the detriment of those that wanted to control spending.
Most players have a 5 percent increase written into their contracts with MLS, so the 4 percent salary cap increase keeps pace with that and means that most teams won’t have to cut players to remain under the cap.This article was written back in 2007, however, it is still relevant today because there are owners who want to spend more to improve the quality of the league and there are owners who want to control spending. We know what the consensus was back in 2007. What would the consensus look like this time, especially with a lot more on the line?
-------------------------------------
p.s. This situation is not exclusive to just MLS. It happens to virtually every other professional leagues. For those who are interested, I believe this is how they reach their consensus/compromise:
NBA consensus: soft cap with luxury tax ($1 penalty for $1 overspending)
NHL consensus: lower limit (100%) and upper limit (139%) hard cap
MLB consensus: luxury tax
NHL consensus: hard cap with bonuses not counted against the cap
[t]here are a number of camps that exist within any league structure, and my role is to ensure that we can reach consensus on a plan going forward that makes sense for everybody.”http://www.sportsbusinessjournal.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=article.main&articleId=57143&requestTimeout=900
Owner-operators weighed two options for player salaries for 2008 during the meeting. The first would see the salary cap rise to $2.3 million a team, while a second would see it increase to around $2.5 million.
No owner-operators were willing to comment on the record about the vote because Commissioner Don Garber threatened to fine anyone who spoke about it.
Sources familiar with the discussion said the Kraft family (owners of the New England Revolution) and Hunt Sports Group (FC Dallas and Columbus Crew) favored a modest increase in the salary cap consistent with previous years’ growth of 4 to 5 percent, while New York Red Bulls representatives favored pushing it beyond $2.5 million per team.
The debate reflected a philosophical divide between the two groups as the young league continues to wrestle with when and how to spend on players. Traditionally, the Kraft and Hunt contingents have favored controlling player costs and minimizing expenses to foster steady league growth, while AEG (Los Angeles Galaxy and Houston Dynamo), Chivas (Chivas USA) and Red Bull have favored spending more on players to improve the quality of play and increase interest in the league.
League executives reached consensus by putting forward a proposal that would see the salary cap rise 4 percent, allowing teams that wanted to spend more the ability to do so, but not at the detriment of those that wanted to control spending.
Most players have a 5 percent increase written into their contracts with MLS, so the 4 percent salary cap increase keeps pace with that and means that most teams won’t have to cut players to remain under the cap.This article was written back in 2007, however, it is still relevant today because there are owners who want to spend more to improve the quality of the league and there are owners who want to control spending. We know what the consensus was back in 2007. What would the consensus look like this time, especially with a lot more on the line?
-------------------------------------
p.s. This situation is not exclusive to just MLS. It happens to virtually every other professional leagues. For those who are interested, I believe this is how they reach their consensus/compromise:
NBA consensus: soft cap with luxury tax ($1 penalty for $1 overspending)
NHL consensus: lower limit (100%) and upper limit (139%) hard cap
MLB consensus: luxury tax
NHL consensus: hard cap with bonuses not counted against the cap