PDA

View Full Version : The View From The South Stands - 2nd DP?



bgnewf
03-29-2010, 11:12 AM
http://tfcpics.com/blog/2010/03/mls-considering-a-2nd-designated-player-roster-spot-for-each-club/

My take on the possibility of a second DP.

Super
03-29-2010, 11:26 AM
I think not counting DP salary towards the cap is the only way the league is able to reward financial success in this league. I understand the reasoning behind parity, as much as I may loathe it, but in order for the MLS to reap any benefits from stronger markets they MUST give these teams a benefit of some sort. If TFC continues to not make the play-offs, what was once a great footy market with tremendous potential is sure to fade away. Not sure the MLS can afford that - especially if it means weaker markets (that aren't making any money) continue to lift the trophy.

I'm not saying we should be allowed to go ahead and outright buy a championship. But I do believe that it is in the best interest of the MLS on a whole that Toronto (and Seattle) do not suck ass. That's not going to be good for anyone. The sell-out crowds and large number of road-trippers that TFC brings to the table gives the league credibility that, quite frankly, benefits ALL clubs in the league.

Get it done, Garber. 2 DP's - zero dollars go towards the cap. It won't hand us a MASSIVE advantage, but it will be big enough to lift us into play-off territory (which is where the MLS needs us to be).

jabbronies
03-29-2010, 11:30 AM
I don't think a second DP spot on this team will help our striker situation.
If the first DP slot couldn't secure one, why would a second one be any different?
Mo doesn't know how to work the numbers properly. A second DP would shorten our bench even more!

In my perfect world, It would've made sense to use the first DP as a striker and then the second as a Central Defender. The second is not a popular choice of position, but I think that smarter and stronger Central defender would do wonders for our defensive game. We wouldn't have guys on the field quoting to the media that they didn't know what they were suppose to do on a set play "a-la" last game

jabbronies
03-29-2010, 11:33 AM
Get it done, Garber. 2 DP's - zero dollars go towards the cap. It won't hand us a MASSIVE advantage, but it will be big enough to lift us into play-off territory (which is where the MLS needs us to be).

I like the idea of having the DP slot count against the cap. However, If they do add a second slot, they should probably only count $200,000 per slot toward the cap.

Totally allowing them to be signed "cap hit free" is too big a jump this early into the program.

Parkdale
03-29-2010, 11:35 AM
I'm not saying we should be allowed to go ahead and outright buy a championship. But I do believe that it is in the best interest of the MLS on a whole that Toronto (and Seattle) do not suck ass.


great point Super.


Leagues are strong when teams are strong, and because of this whole 'league parity' thing, the teams that are strong can exist in weak markets - and that's not good for the team. In a way, it was good for NYRB to tank last year, because they've changed so much and are coming back stronger. I with the same could be said for TFC.

Beach_Red
03-29-2010, 11:49 AM
I think not counting DP salary towards the cap is the only way the league is able to reward financial success in this league. I understand the reasoning behind parity, as much as I may loathe it, but in order for the MLS to reap any benefits from stronger markets they MUST give these teams a benefit of some sort. If TFC continues to not make the play-offs, what was once a great footy market with tremendous potential is sure to fade away. Not sure the MLS can afford that - especially if it means weaker markets (that aren't making any money) continue to lift the trophy.

I'm not saying we should be allowed to go ahead and outright buy a championship. But I do believe that it is in the best interest of the MLS on a whole that Toronto (and Seattle) do not suck ass. That's not going to be good for anyone. The sell-out crowds and large number of road-trippers that TFC brings to the table gives the league credibility that, quite frankly, benefits ALL clubs in the league.

Get it done, Garber. 2 DP's - zero dollars go towards the cap. It won't hand us a MASSIVE advantage, but it will be big enough to lift us into play-off territory (which is where the MLS needs us to be).


I agree, as much as I hate the DP rule, if it's going to be here then it should definitely not apply to the cap.

But the difference between should and will is huge. Seattle will do it, for sure, so will LA and probably New York, but will TFC?

There are all kinds of things TFC could spend money on now but they don't. It took them years to approve the first DP and I wonder what restrictions were placed on the choice. Did it have to be a Canadian, for example? We don't really know.

Well, I guess it will be another thing to pressure them to do.

Pookie
03-29-2010, 11:54 AM
I'd love to be a fly on the wall when De Rosario learns that we are bringing in a second DP

Super
03-29-2010, 12:27 PM
There are all kinds of things TFC could spend money on now but they don't. It took them years to approve the first DP and I wonder what restrictions were placed on the choice. Did it have to be a Canadian, for example? We don't really know.

As far as nationality, I can guarantee you that it has nothing to do with nationality. Most, if not all, DP's in the league are foreigners. It's TFC that wants to bring in Canadians to strengthen the identity of the club as Canadian. Unfortunately, so far, it's been at the expense of results.

If we get a second DP spot it MUST be used on bringing in a striker. Spend 2-3 million and you'll have some fire power up front that could lift us from bottom team to play-off worthy. That's easily worth the money.

DeRo won't get the spot. If he doesn't like the salary he gets here then he's welcome to try for better somewhere else. He won't get it!

Parkdale
03-29-2010, 12:31 PM
It took them years to approve the first DP and I wonder what restrictions were placed on the choice.

you make it sound like they took "years" to do it.

there was no point in having a DP in the first year, getting a DP was approved in the 2nd year pending the right player at the right prices, and in the 3rd year - we got one.

you make it sound like they've been dinking around for a decade.

Stouffville_RPB
03-29-2010, 12:31 PM
I'd love to be a fly on the wall when De Rosario learns that we are bringing in a second DP

Probably not the best idea. DeRo would be pissed and be looking to squash something. :D

Beach_Red
03-29-2010, 12:52 PM
you make it sound like they took "years" to do it.

there was no point in having a DP in the first year, getting a DP was approved in the 2nd year pending the right player at the right prices, and in the 3rd year - we got one.

you make it sound like they've been dinking around for a decade.


Why was there no point in the first year, it worked for Seattle? I used to think it wouldn't have been a good idea in the first year, either, but I've changed my mind since. Why not a one year contract on a late-career big name? Because we didn't need to sell tickets? Maybe not, but we could have used a few goals.

As for nationality, I meant did it matter to the marketing department? Was it a condition given by the ownership, part of the "right" player at the right price?

Dinking around for a year feels like a decade - they have the money, why not spend it? All the reasons they had now just seem like excuses not to spend money. Why should one of only two profitable teams in this league do anything on the cheap? The other profitable team spends the money...

Parkdale
03-29-2010, 12:57 PM
Why should one of only two profitable teams in this league do anything on the cheap? The other profitable team spends the money...


and so do we - you're saying that like we don't have a DP player making a big chunk of change. We do! they are spending the money (look at the cost of grass installation and lamport's redevelopment).

You say they aren't spending money, and I say they are. It's too bad what they are spending the money on isn't going to win us the championship (in the short term, but it doesn't hurt).

Chevy
03-29-2010, 01:02 PM
Probably not the best idea. DeRo would be pissed and be looking to squash something. :D

You could make DeRo the second "DP" at $500k (give him a bit of a raise to make it look good and keep him happy), and then bring in another player at $400k.

Stouffville_RPB
03-29-2010, 01:05 PM
You could make DeRo the second "DP" at $500k (give him a bit of a raise to make it look good and keep him happy), and then bring in another player at $400k.

What is the point of a 2nd DP then? I get what your saying but if you are going to get a DP it should be a go big or go home mentality.

Beach_Red
03-29-2010, 01:10 PM
and so do we - you're saying that like we don't have a DP player making a big chunk of change. We do! they are spending the money (look at the cost of grass installation and lamport's redevelopment).

You say they aren't spending money, and I say they are. It's too bad what they are spending the money on isn't going to win us the championship (in the short term, but it doesn't hurt).


Yeah, I used to agree with you, but now the team has been around long enough that the patterns are starting to emerge and there's been enough experience to have some perspective.

They're spending money on what they're pressured into spending money on. If a second DP slot is awarded, they'll get one. Maybe not the first year it's available, but they'll get one.

Viruk42
03-29-2010, 01:32 PM
Probably not the best idea. DeRo would be pissed and be looking to squash something. :D

By the time this actually comes into effect, maybe DeRo won't be worth a DP slot? He is turning 32 in May, so if the extra slot is allowed for the 2012 season, he'll be almost 34 and nearing retirement.

Super
03-29-2010, 01:47 PM
It should most definitely be in DeRo's best interest that we bring in a second DP - and not a $600k washed up striker from somewhere. We need a top striker, $3 mil striker - around 28-33. Someone like Angel would be ideal. And a player like that is expensive. Very expensive!

MG42
03-29-2010, 01:50 PM
and so do we - you're saying that like we don't have a DP player making a big chunk of change. We do! they are spending the money (look at the cost of grass installation and lamport's redevelopment).

You say they aren't spending money, and I say they are. It's too bad what they are spending the money on isn't going to win us the championship (in the short term, but it doesn't hurt).


That money from the Edu transfer had to be used on the team and not pocketed...just sayin

Nuvinho
03-29-2010, 01:53 PM
Let's say your 1st DP does not count towards the cap, but your 2nd one counts for $400K.

For TFC, they can keep JDG as the 1st DP.......then with the extra $400K in cap space bring in 2 quality players and/or top up DeRo's salary.

Yohan
03-29-2010, 03:43 PM
DPs without a hit in the cap would destablity the parity too much.

C'mon guys. Just look at the latest CBA agreement and gauge the mood. Conservative raise in salary cap. I can't imagine majority of the owners would want to damage parity around at this point.

Kinda funny though, how all the new SSS are going to cost tens of millions, but I digress.