The official CBA thread

[Yohan]

Because current CBA ends after this season.
http://www.sbnation.com/soccer/2014/2/24/5430700/MLS-cba-battle

[dupont]

This will be interesting. The DP rule has showed that there are a handful of teams willing to drop massive dollars but they are only allowed to spend it on two or three players. The league as a whole won't see a huge increase in quality until the teams are able to spend that money on a balanced roster. Imagine if TFC would be allowed to spend the 100 million on the entire roster instead of two players. They could build a very well rounded squad. Obviously they wouldn't spend that much since a lot of that 100 million is attached to marketing and advertising specific players but any boost in salary cap will provide real benefits to MLS.

[ag futbol]

I think it's more comparable to look at yearly payroll when judging how much we are spending.

Bradley + Defoe + Gilberto + reg roster = 6+6+1+2= approximately 15M in payroll per year. Ignoring transfer fees that puts a top MLS team in the range of mid but not elite sides in leagues such as France, Holland, or Portugal. Believe the top Liga MX sides spend somewhere in that neighbourhood too.
Now that being said these guys typically have resources MLS teams don't, ie better development pyramids, more transfer dollars etc...

[Yohan]

One of attractiveness of MLS is the perception that player wages are under control. Owners like the choice of salary cap and ability to spend money on DP players if they choose. By drastically increase salary cap, MLS loses that attractiveness and be seen just as another league where player wages are out of control.

MLS aren't attracting all investors who are soccer nuts. They want to buy into a league that makes money. (for most part) And these billionaires don't make a habit of buying into bad investments.

And if the salary cap goes up too much, then it will be seen that MLS is too weak, and the player's union is too strong. Perception is the key

[OgtheDim]

Does the nature of how TFC and NYFC will provide an ROI to their owners, through content, change how this CBA develops?

[Yohan]

Does the nature of how TFC and NYFC will provide an ROI to their owners, through content, change how this CBA develops?
I don't think so, at least not in short term. I think DP rule is going to expand.

If we look at CBA from MLSPU's POV, the players union is going to look more for job security (more free agency, more guaranteed contracts) and benefits that affect the majority of players, not just few big name players. I think, MLSPU will be pushing for more upper limit of max wage before DP, rather than more DP spots.

Increasing salary cap doesn't guarantee that majority of current players will benefit. General trend has always been team FOs will spend most of the cap on players 1 -11, and maybe on couple of first off the bench subs. With so loose of foreign quota in MLS, and how easy it is to get a green card to go around that foreign quota, too much increase in the cap has potential to make a lot of current players out of their jobs, as the FOs will continue to look towards better foreign players for starting 11.

I see a push for raise of min wage again, maybe more roster spots esp with HG and reserve team programs going to take off.

So, MLSPU will want a piece of increased spending by owners, but only if it can benefit majority of the players, and it protects job security also.

[Detroit_TFC]

Merritt Paulson was asked about expansion to 4 DPs in next CBA recently (either online or at a Timbers Army event, I forget which) and he said flat out "no."

He occasionally shoots from the lip so I wouldn't bank on this but it may reflect current view of owners right now.

[Pookie]

Merritt Paulson was asked about expansion to 4 DPs in next CBA recently (either online or at a Timbers Army event, I forget which) and he said flat out "no."

He occasionally shoots from the lip so I wouldn't bank on this but it may reflect current view of owners right now.

People also forget that the MLS is a development league with the primary goal of feeding the US national teams. That's why we have a quota system, one skewed towards protecting American jobs in my opinion.

More internationals. More DPs. That means less jobs for US players. It makes a tidy profit but it would seem that the bulk of that comes from expansion fees and SUM television rights. The motivation to lower US domestic quotas in favour of high priced international talent would seemingly be contained to just a couple of owners... who by the way are more like operators considering MLS itself is the owner.

[prizby]

from a players perspective, MLS is attractive league to play in because your paycheck will always be received in its entirety and on time

[Detroit_TFC]

People also forget that the MLS is a development league with the primary goal of feeding the US national teams. That's why we have a quota system, one skewed towards protecting American jobs in my opinion.

More internationals. More DPs. That means less jobs for US players. It makes a tidy profit but it would seem that the bulk of that comes from expansion fees and SUM television rights. The motivation to lower US domestic quotas in favour of high priced international talent would seemingly be contained to just a couple of owners... who by the way are more like operators considering MLS itself is the owner.

That is very possibly the thinking. The past period has been about getting the non-North American talent. If that focus has shifted to using the NA domestic talent (incl bringing back Nat team players) then the answer would be bigger rosters and bigger paychecks for a wider range of players. Ironically, I guess, doing either or both of those might make MLS more attractive to non-domestic players too.

[jloome]

One of attractiveness of MLS is the perception that player wages are under control. Owners like the choice of salary cap and ability to spend money on DP players if they choose. By drastically increase salary cap, MLS loses that attractiveness and be seen just as another league where player wages are out of control.

MLS aren't attracting all investors who are soccer nuts. They want to buy into a league that makes money. (for most part) And these billionaires don't make a habit of buying into bad investments.

And if the salary cap goes up too much, then it will be seen that MLS is too weak, and the player's union is too strong. Perception is the key

True. But keep in mind, too, that even far smaller teams in Europe, ASia and Africa have bigger budgets than anyone in MLS. Right now, it is restrictively low relative to franchise value; franchise value, in turn, is exceptionally high not because of bottom line but because corporate tax laws in the U.S. allow write-downs against subsidiaries. So MLS is a cash cow for some owners, even though their bottom line shows a loss.

In fact, some of them would probably argue that by upping the salary cap to about $6M per season, they'd be in line with competing leagues for players (i.e. Scandinavia and Holland) but still able to write losses on the books easily even if their team is successful. COuld be a win-win.

[Pookie]

True. But keep in mind, too, that even far smaller teams in Europe, ASia and Africa have bigger budgets than anyone in MLS. Right now, it is restrictively low relative to franchise value; franchise value, in turn, is exceptionally high not because of bottom line but because corporate tax laws in the U.S. allow write-downs against subsidiaries. So MLS is a cash cow for some owners, even though their bottom line shows a loss.

In fact, some of them would probably argue that by upping the salary cap to about $6M per season, they'd be in line with competing leagues for players (i.e. Scandinavia and Holland) but still able to write losses on the books easily even if their team is successful. COuld be a win-win.

The fun question I always wrestle with is whether an increased cap would help compete for players or whether a better use of it would be to raise the minimum salaries and remove the non-guaranteed nature of entry level contracts.

If the player quota stays the same and the money is used on international slots all that they would accomplish is creating a bigger financial divide amongst those in the locker room. TFC's all over the place.

If the quota changes though and it becomes a free market what does that do to US programs? It would all but kill Canada's. The top players would rise to capture bigger dollars but there would be fewer of them as players give up to find real jobs. Canadians already have it tough. Ranked one hundred and something suggests that the development program itself is flawed. Combine that with restrictive roster rules that treat Canadians as Internationals in the US and wow, that becomes bleak.

The best solution may be to use any salary increase on domestic players to make soccer a viable career option for a larger number of North Americans... and relax the Canadians as Internationals rule. With the US ranking amongst the top in the world, that might do more for the long term competitive balance than attracting big names from worldly locales.

I really think that changing the Canadians as Internationals rule would be one of the biggest things that the 3 Canadian MLS teams could do to alter the fate for youth of this country going forward.

[OgtheDim]

..
I really think that changing the Canadians as Internationals rule would be one of the biggest things that the 3 Canadian MLS teams could do to alter the fate for youth of this country going forward.

I believe that's a US labour law issue and thus unlikely to change. That and IIRC, Vancouver is not in favour of Canadians being mandated for the Canadian teams. They don't mind if they come along but would prefer to be able to choose between Yanks and Canucks.

[ag futbol]

Labor law theory doesn't wash. Can't remember whether it's USL or NASL, but they count Canadians as full domestics.

[Pint]

Labor law theory doesn't wash. Can't remember whether it's USL or NASL, but they count Canadians as full domestics.

USL pro Canadians count as domestics... which is a good thing for us to be able to develop our young guys with Wilmington

[Villa TFC]

I don't know anything about Labor Law, but I also find this very hard to believe. Has anyone ever heard of any similar issues with NHL, NFL, NBA or MLB? The MLS was created to help further the sport of soccer in the U.S. and to help improve the strength of the national team. Canada didn't feature in that mandate. I think the rule has a lot more to do with a lack of interest/desire than it has any labor laws (although I'm purely guessing here). As for Vancouver, as much as I want TFC to succeed, I would be very uncomfortable if we worked against the development of Canadian talent. I think there's a moral obligation - and a long-term financial incentive - to help development young Canadian talent. I would not be very happy if Toronto had a similar position to Vancouver.

[Yohan]

I don't know anything about Labor Law, but I also find this very hard to believe. Has anyone ever heard of any similar issues with NHL, NFL, NBA or MLB? The MLS was created to help further the sport of soccer in the U.S. and to help improve the strength of the national team. Canada didn't feature in that mandate. I think the rule has a lot more to do with a lack of interest/desire than it has any labor laws (although I'm purely guessing here). As for Vancouver, as much as I want TFC to succeed, I would be very uncomfortable if we worked against the development of Canadian talent. I think there's a moral obligation - and a long-term financial incentive - to help development young Canadian talent. I would not be very happy if Toronto had a similar position to Vancouver.
Clubs develop youth players because it is their first goal to produce good players to help the first team win. I'd say this is the philosophy of most soccer teams in the world. Any help to national team is almost an accident by product of youth development. If you put national team aspirations ahead of the winning, well, it's very hard to win and develop national team players esp youngsters at the same time.

As for Vancouver, one of reasons why Rennie's contract wasn't renewed is that he didn't give the youths enough of a chance. The Caps have a boatload of good HG players that needs mins. They've seen what Teibert can do, and other guys like Fisk, Alderson (another Ontario boy!) should get a contract as well. That Carducci kid I think might be Canada #1 in the future. So, Robbo will give the youths a chance (and he has said this repeately), but the Caps will be doing this because they think the kids will help them win in the future, not to be a feeder club for Canada.

[OgtheDim]

Labor law theory doesn't wash. Can't remember whether it's USL or NASL, but they count Canadians as full domestics.

To be honest, labour law is what I hear every time this is mentioned on a US based board. The response to the NASL and USL thing is usually :noidea:

[goodyear]

Labour Laws are not the issue. Canadian kids are getting the short end of the stick league wide to keep the Canadian clubs happy. If US based clubs could sign our talent up as domestics, this would drive up the price on TFC, Vancouver and Montreal for local talent. They don't want that! Therefore, the rules as they sit now is perfect for Canadian clubs. Just not for Canadian players.

[Ajax TFC]

Labour Laws is a load of BS. MLS is a single entity that exists in Canada and the USA. Surely they should be able to make a rule limiting the number of players not from one of the two countries that the league exists in.

As for another DP spot, I don't think it's in the union's interest to fight to allow more money to be spent on star players. That's money that they'll likely be fighting to have added to the cap.
I don't know what the union's position is, but I would imagine that they would be fighting for more players to be making good money (increase in minimum salary). I think there would be a noticeable increase in quality if the base salary doubled and there were a lot more 200k salaries (similar to the number of current 100k salaries)

[notthesun]

Labor law theory doesn't wash. Can't remember whether it's USL or NASL, but they count Canadians as full domestics.

Could possibly be both, but USL counts Canadians as domestic (https://twitter.com/24thminute/status/426078449464139776).

[Commie Red]

To be honest, labour law is what I hear every time this is mentioned on a US based board. The response to the NASL and USL thing is usually :noidea:

It was Don Garber himself who told TSN’s Jason DeVos during last year's First Kick broadcast that it was U.S. Labour Law which was the problem. There's a very nice summary of the issue here (http://the11.ca/2013/04/24/the-fine-lines-labour-law-competitive-balance-canadians-and-mls/) .

Personally, I don't buy it and I think it should be a bigger issue for Canadian Supporters (and SGs?). If nothing else, no one ever raises the question as to whether MLS hiring practices and preferential treatment of American players is legal in Canada. That is, if American teams can't discriminate in favour of Canadian players over other foreign players (although, oddly, in the USL they can), how is it that Canadian MLS teams can discriminate in favour of American players (over other foreigners)? I'm not a lawyer, but I can't believe that that is actually legal in Canada. The visa requirements that allow foreign athletes and entertainers to enter Canada specifically stipulates that Canadian athletes and entertainers must be granted reciprocal treatment in the athlete's home country. Well forget that, Canadian soccer players are not even treated as well as American players in their own country!

Barring the elimination of the domestic player rules or reducing it to 3 players for all teams (essentially what we have for Canadian player development), one simple solution is to change the definition of a "domestic player", to one based on place of training instead of nationality. For example, a "domestic player" could be so designated if they had trained in North America for 3 years before the age of 18, etc.. Legal problem solved Mr. Garber.

[ag futbol]

Keep in mind a large part of the reason for producing local players is to serve as a catalyst to find a larger domestic audience. Yes the associations sanction and mandate content rules but the reason clubs fall in line with them is because they are *usually* in the pro teams best interests.

[brad]

Clubs develop youth players because it is their first goal to produce good players to help the first team win. I'd say this is the philosophy of most soccer teams in the world. Any help to national team is almost an accident by product of youth development. If you put national team aspirations ahead of the winning, well, it's very hard to win and develop national team players esp youngsters at the same time.

You know, in some cases (maybe many cases), this is still true. But in a lot of places, developing players for the first team is now the secondary goal of academies. Developing players to sell to larger clubs at a huge profit is the primary goal. There was an in depth article about Ajax floating around in the Winter days talking about this being an issue nowdays at Ajax.

There was also an interesting bit about this in the Alex Ferguson book. He talked about how profitable the academy is - developing those fringe players and selling them off. He said something to the extent that his net transfer spend over his time at United was basically zero, due largely to the money made off these players.

To be honest, I've often been skeptical about the whole youth academy push in the MLS. Sure, you can raise that talent bar if done right, but I've always wondered if the primary driver is developing players to make a profit off.

[Yohan]

You know, in some cases (maybe many cases), this is still true. But in a lot of places, developing players for the first team is now the secondary goal of academies. Developing players to sell to larger clubs at a huge profit is the primary goal. There was an in depth article about Ajax floating around in the Winter days talking about this being an issue nowdays at Ajax.

There was also an interesting bit about this in the Alex Ferguson book. He talked about how profitable the academy is - developing those fringe players and selling them off. He said something to the extent that his net transfer spend over his time at United was basically zero, due largely to the money made off these players.

To be honest, I've often been skeptical about the whole youth academy push in the MLS. Sure, you can raise that talent bar if done right, but I've always wondered if the primary driver is developing players to make a profit off.
This may be true, but MLS is one of the leagues where it's relatively easier for youths to break into first team. With low cap and need for bodies, cheap youth players likely get more chance with an MLS team. So I think MLS is more of a development league than selling league.

[Pookie]

To be honest, I've often been skeptical about the whole youth academy push in the MLS. Sure, you can raise that talent bar if done right, but I've always wondered if the primary driver is developing players to make a profit off.

Selling players may be the goal of the big clubs but honestly, MLS teams appear to have a more fundamental goal than that. I'm sure they would like to sell players but labour laws allow players under 18 to leave and sign overseas before MLS can ink them. If a player is good enough, an international team could swoop in and sign the player on its own turns.

Remember, MLS owns itself. MLS mandated each team have an Academy. Why?

No one was in the board room but the estimated $200M sponsorship deal with Adidas provides some interesting discussion points:



"Both of us are feeling really good about the partnership we have had since the start of the MLS and the first deal that we did. ... We both felt this was the time to talk this deal out for a longer time frame and for spending the money on the youth development of the game in the U.S," Adidas America president Patrik Nilsson said.



"The goal will be to make a very direct link between our academies, our reserve league, our youth programs with a lot of the other youth programs going on in this country," Garber said. "Adidas can play a very important role in creating that bridge and solidifying all those ties."



Nilsson said he sees a bridge missing between the high school level and professional level and hopes the money included in this new deal will help strengthen that link. "I think that is one area where we need to do more and MLS has acknowledged that," Nilsson said. "That is one of the key reasons why we decided to change this deal now and be able to invest stronger toward investing in that direction."

http://espn.go.com/sports/soccer/news/_/id/5511821/adidas-mls-sign-8-year-sponsorship-contract

The higher the number of players in MLS' youth system, the bigger the target market. Companies pay fees to access a large target market. Appears to be a pretty fundamental reason why MLS may want its franchises to have a large and robust youth program.

[Abou Sky]

This seems like as good of a place as any for this but: Would doubling the salary cap really be a bad thing for anyone?

If team owners are working on such slim margins that they can't handle $5m of salaries I think there are other problems other than wages.

That would allow for the average in-cap salary to be around $165k which is at least livable. Also, bring up the bottom to $65-$70k, these guys are professionals who have been plying their trade for at least 10-12 years before their rookie season (training from age 6)

I really do feel terribly for these kids, throw them a damn bone.

[Initial B]

I think MLS doesn't want to artificially inflate the worth of domestic players to the point where you could get better players from abroad than at home for the same price.

That said, I think the minimum cap for 2015 should be at least $4 million, though I'd be more comfortable with $4.5-5 million cap. Increase the salaries of all the players (including the minimums) by $15,000 each. That would only increase the cap by a maximum of $450K, leaving another $0.5-1 million to pursue better quality players. But that quality will be limited by supply and demand and the number of international slots available. I could see international slots being very coveted after the next CBA.

[Ajax TFC]

This seems like as good of a place as any for this but: Would doubling the salary cap really be a bad thing for anyone?

If team owners are working on such slim margins that they can't handle $5m of salaries I think there are other problems other than wages.

That would allow for the average in-cap salary to be around $165k which is at least livable. Also, bring up the bottom to $65-$70k, these guys are professionals who have been plying their trade for at least 10-12 years before their rookie season (training from age 6)

I really do feel terribly for these kids, throw them a damn bone.
$5m divided by 20 on cap roster spots = an average in-cap salary of 250k. That should allow teams to bring in more quality players and hold onto players for longer, which will improve the overall quality of play in the league

Also, I think the maximum cap hit should stay low relative to the total cap to prevent players from being able to demand huge maximum salaries that would still leave little cap space for the rest of the squad. I think more balanced rosters with a higher average quality is needed.

[ag futbol]

I really do feel terribly for these kids, throw them a damn bone.
I would simply argue greater money is needed to draw greater talents. 45-50k doesn't give you much to work with. I know inflation / lack of talent is a common counterpoint but it's simply chicken and egg. Pay the money, invest in the system, yield the talent.

Right now you still have holdouts taking the Europe or bust route and people who career switch before even considering putting in the training effort to go pro. Any decent career path that attracts type-A pro sports players will quickly dwarf Entry level MLS comp and has the added bonus of avoiding the dreaded post career switch.

We will probably look back at these times at some point in the future with a bit of admiration. Players will be better, but they will lose a lot of the real-person qualities they have right now. We'll be talking about more aircheque signers, holdouts, and forced transfers, less guys cleaning pools, taking public transit, or living in the assistant coach's basement.

[Super]

No one has talked about it in this thread, but I'm slightly concerned about the possibility of a strike. A LOT will be on the table at the next CBA, and no doubt either side will want to come out ahead. Could get ugly.

[mcolvy]

No one has talked about it in this thread, but I'm slightly concerned about the possibility of a strike. A LOT will be on the table at the next CBA, and no doubt either side will want to come out ahead. Could get ugly.

Unlike the other major sports leagues in NA, MLS doesn't represent the best athletes in their particular sport in the world. This means that MLS does not need to fight for the players currently within MLS. Aka if you want to be paid more $$ etc, we can find other people who will do this the way we want. In other leagues that just won't happen. There is also a ton of league turnover. MLS Owners will be able to construct pretty much every term they want. Players might be able to choose one particular thing that they mandate in order for them to ever sign the new CBA and when they get that thing they will chalk this negotiation as a win.

Things we have been discussing like more DP slots dont really help current MLSers, sure some of them would like to graduate to DP type money, but chances are that money wont be evenly distributed. Usually it goes to foreigners. I see the Players wanting to have real free agency, less option years in contracts, teams retaining player right etc stuff that blocks players from gaining more money in contract due to demand. Itll be fun to watch it play out, but a lockout = potential end to MLS. The whole world has started to take notice of our league structure and the positives , but if they see the downside of a full on strike it will kill the leagues image. That might also work in the players favour.....hmmm

[ag futbol]

I disagree that we don't have to fight for players, it's a global market for talent and it's competitive. MLS will ultimately get whatever it decides to pay for.

I'll be shocked if the union doesn't make up ground this time out. Optics are already heavily in the MLSPU's favor and they went and brought in big time sports union negotiators after the last CBA. They handled the last round poorly and they seem very focused on fixing it.

The league is not in a good position to allow a strike with their expansion plans while many lower end guys - who will be the focus of this, not DP slots - have very little to lose.

[Alonso]

I disagree that we don't have to fight for players, it's a global market for talent and it's competitive. MLS will ultimately get whatever it decides to pay for.

I'll be shocked if the union doesn't make up ground this time out. Optics are already heavily in the MLSPU's favor and they went and brought in big time sports union negotiators after the last CBA. They handled the last round poorly and they seem very focused on fixing it.

The league is not in a good position to allow a strike with their expansion plans while many lower end guys - who will be the focus of this, not DP slots - have very little to lose.


Yup.

And the league is going to find little sympathy at all with the fans who want better football and who understand minimum wages in the $40,000 range isn't going to cut it.

[Yohan]

hmmmmmm

http://www.sportsbusinessdaily.com/Journal/Issues/2014/02/24/In-Depth/Roundtable.aspx


SBJ: Don Garber said recently that the league is losing $75 million to $100 million a year. What was your reaction to that?

PAULSON: It’s very accurate. There’s a balance that happens in every league. The reality is that the league is losing what it’s losing. There are a lot of strong trends and there has been a lot of great growth, but there’s more work to be done.

[prizby]

hmmmmmm

http://www.sportsbusinessdaily.com/Journal/Issues/2014/02/24/In-Depth/Roundtable.aspx

[/COLOR][/COLOR][/B]

no way those numbers include the money the league and its teams are making off of SUM

[Yohan]

no way those numbers include the money the league and its teams are making off of SUM
it does not. but legally, SUM is a separate company from MLS (mainly due to its interest in US national team and Mexican national team stuff)

[prizby]

fair or not, this is what I'd like to see the cap be like

$5 million
$500k max budget hit
4 DP's; at least one has to be either domestic or young; young DP's cap hit is $300k (21-23); 200k (20 and under)
roster size increased to 32
cap budgeted players increased to top 24 paid
senior roster player minimum - $75,000
developmental roster player minimum - $60,000

no more stupid special rules;
- allocation money can only be used to buy a player from another team in league or out of league
- no retention fund
- no special DP
- no more GA or HGP cap relief

etc..

- no more charter limit;
you fly domestic if the flight time is x long (2.5 hours maybe 3 hours);
you have the option of flying charter if A. there is no direct flight from your cities airport to your opponents airport B. flight time is over the decided reasonable amount C. there is only 1 direct flight a day from your city to your opponents and would cause a team to have an unusual practice time or miss a practice completely.

Also would like to see
- minimum training ground requirements (most teams would probably meet this by now)
- minimum standards for an academy program

Last couple things for me, and maybe this is a step above and beyond, but feel it would be more towards parity/fairness (especially point 1 & 3)
- Room (the difference in what you can get in some cities vs. others is ridiculous; $600/month would go a lot farther in Columbus than in Toronto on a room rental)
- Car (a lot of teams have a partnership with a car company; would it be so hard to equip these players with, in Toronto's case, a KIA, or something like that)
- Equalization payments; especially now with Florida teams coming in, it is less attractive to play in certain markets over other markets due to the way players are taxed; maybe instead of having gross salaries, all salaries can be considered net

[prizby]

it does not. but legally, SUM is a separate company from MLS (mainly due to its interest in US national team and Mexican national team stuff)

legally yes, but for the owners to cry they aren't making money when they also have a piece of this property as part of being a league owner is completely ridiculous

[Yohan]

legally yes, but for the owners to cry they aren't making money when they also have a piece of this property as part of being a league owner is completely ridiculous
I get you, and I partly agree, but SUM is technically separate from MLS and it counts as another asset for an owner. Kinda like MLSE forced to consider Raptors as part of TFC property, and its earning. (this is what I understand from legal POV)

[Abou Sky]

Last couple things for me, and maybe this is a step above and beyond, but feel it would be more towards parity/fairness (especially point 1 & 3)
- Room (the difference in what you can get in some cities vs. others is ridiculous; $600/month would go a lot farther in Columbus than in Toronto on a room rental)
- Car (a lot of teams have a partnership with a car company; would it be so hard to equip these players with, in Toronto's case, a KIA, or something like that)
- Equalization payments; especially now with Florida teams coming in, it is less attractive to play in certain markets over other markets due to the way players are taxed; maybe instead of having gross salaries, all salaries can be considered net

I want to see someone try to get Defoe to drive a Kia :p

[Yohan]

http://pressbox.mlssoccer.com/content/designated-players#overlay-context=content/media-resources

list of current DPs. Every team has at least 1 DP. 2/3 of DPs come from Central/South America, most are on 'low' DP salary I'd bet.

[Alonso]

fair or not, this is what I'd like to see the cap be like

$5 million
$500k max budget hit
4 DP's; at least one has to be either domestic or young; young DP's cap hit is $300k (21-23); 200k (20 and under)
roster size increased to 32
cap budgeted players increased to top 24 paid
senior roster player minimum - $75,000
developmental roster player minimum - $60,000

no more stupid special rules;
- allocation money can only be used to buy a player from another team in league or out of league
- no retention fund
- no special DP
- no more GA or HGP cap relief

etc..

- no more charter limit;
you fly domestic if the flight time is x long (2.5 hours maybe 3 hours);
you have the option of flying charter if A. there is no direct flight from your cities airport to your opponents airport B. flight time is over the decided reasonable amount C. there is only 1 direct flight a day from your city to your opponents and would cause a team to have an unusual practice time or miss a practice completely.

Also would like to see
- minimum training ground requirements (most teams would probably meet this by now)
- minimum standards for an academy program

Last couple things for me, and maybe this is a step above and beyond, but feel it would be more towards parity/fairness (especially point 1 & 3)
- Room (the difference in what you can get in some cities vs. others is ridiculous; $600/month would go a lot farther in Columbus than in Toronto on a room rental)
- Car (a lot of teams have a partnership with a car company; would it be so hard to equip these players with, in Toronto's case, a KIA, or something like that)
- Equalization payments; especially now with Florida teams coming in, it is less attractive to play in certain markets over other markets due to the way players are taxed; maybe instead of having gross salaries, all salaries can be considered net

I like all this, but I would up the minimum salaries, and the salary cap to $6 M to compensate.

[buddies]

Every team in Europe dreams of UEFA Champions League qualification. For MLS to take it to the next level, the obvious next step has to be to create a salary structure that at the very least allows teams rich enough or ambitious enough to beat the Mexicans! Until MLS teams regularly win the CONCACAF Champions League, MLS will be considered "Retirement League Football" and will struggle to attract the 20 something crowd of elite players to the league. TFC with a tens of millions of dollar wage bill in a $3M capped league is an example of some of the flexibility they have built into the salary cap already. Now they need to either increase the cap to Mexican average budgets (in time) or this league will never climb the ladder and become a top 5 league in the world.

As an example of the things they could consider, how about a form of revenue sharing similar to the proven European leagues? I mean, lets be honest, there are very few teams in the English Premier League that can be confident that they can achieve the goal of UEFA Champions League qualification and the rest of the teams don't have a hope in hell of getting there. Look at Southampton this past season ... they finished eighth and stand to lose Lallana, Lambert and Shaw at the very least. For that showing though, they stand to reap a small fortune in transfer fees and add-ons. That's how the world of football has worked for a hundred years. If you ask me, MLS NEEDS to take the reigns off of teams like NYCFC, LA Galaxy, Toronto FC, NYRB and anyone else that wants to build a team capable of winning the Concacaf Champions League and for the rest of the teams the reward for supporting it would be a massively increased TV deal and the opportunity to develop a young player and sell him on ... just like Toronto FC did with Maurice Edu ... except that another MLS team should be allowed to purchase the remainder of a current MLS players contract too ... that way, teams like Columbus?? could turn a profit on a young DP when he develops into a mature player which would in turn allow them to operate at a higher budget than they would otherwise have had and the owner will make his tidy profit. If you ask me, adding a million or two onto the salary cap or tweaking minimum salaries or enhancing allocation amounts is just lipstick on a pig and will do nothing for the league as a whole. TFC already spend way more than that on salary anyway. This league needs to import a LOT more younger talent of the Michael Bradley age and not just Americans for MLS to be taken seriously in the global football world. Until that day comes, why would NBC ever want to pay a lot of money to MLS for TV rights when they can televise a better product from England ... and TV money is the ONLY thing that will advance this league to where MLS keep saying they want to take it.

[OgtheDim]

Fair enough points but the supposition to start them all is flawed.

Competing with the Mexican league is like competing against Russia for a World Cup....its amazing where the money comes from to get things done.

[jloome]

I get you, and I partly agree, but SUM is technically separate from MLS and it counts as another asset for an owner. Kinda like MLSE forced to consider Raptors as part of TFC property, and its earning. (this is what I understand from legal POV)

It's all moot anyway, though, Yohan. Tax structures in the US allow for writedowns from related corporate entities. In essence, any owner can use his MLS team as a write-down machine and claim a loss at the end of the year.

The year the Galaxy signed Beckham, it sold 250,000 Beckham jersey's alone ... and claimed to have made a $2 million profit on the entire year, despite being sold out most games.

All of this financial news from MLS strikes me as nonsense; the friggin' CFL has a $5M salary cap, has a $96,000 figure for base pay, has much larger rosters, and half the teams still do okay financially.

[Defoe]

I would like to see a 5 million dollar cap and a 4th dp slot added... MLS has over 30 players going to the World Cup and nearly half alone on the U.S team... I defiantly think something has to give here... Keep developing players and keep adding the Labas of South America and you're in good shape moving forward.

[prizby]

I would like to see a 5 million dollar cap and a 4th dp slot added... MLS has over 30 players going to the World Cup and nearly half alone on the U.S team... I defiantly think something has to give here... Keep developing players and keep adding the Labas of South America and you're in good shape moving forward.

21 actually to the world cup

[Strikers]

What I really want to see that would free up some money in the cap and be a very good compromise for league and players,
is to have your DP players salary not count against the cap at all. This would free up some much needed cash to sign more players or bump up some players salaries.

Also I would continue to keep a max of 3 DP players per team.

[Oldtimer]

It's all moot anyway, though, Yohan. Tax structures in the US allow for writedowns from related corporate entities. In essence, any owner can use his MLS team as a write-down machine and claim a loss at the end of the year.



Exactly, the Owner-Operators benefit twice.

1. They make a lot of money in SUM, which is not shown as earnings to the franchise much because most of the earnings aren't paid out as dividends.

2. They then claim a large tax-loss on their team franchise, which excludes the substantial TV revenues (under SUM) on the income side, and has phony, inflated (but legal) stadium depreciation on the cost side. They offset the tax-loss against their taxable income from their other businesses. Lowering taxes is just as good as bringing in more money, the result is the same.

The owner-operators then have the temerity to claim to the Player's Union that MLS is "losing money" based on their phony tax-losses. That's laughable, smart people don't pay $50-$100 million in franchise fees (plus stadium costs) to lose money.

[brad]

The key to making this league stronger isn't adding more star power or big names, it's bringing up the calibre of bottom level player, and allowing for depth that is not semi-pro quality.

Depth is a big deal. Obviously it is needed for covering injuries and absences. If teams are to compete in the CL, they need depth to handle the extra games. But the side of depth that is seldom talked about is competition for places. Many players/positions are pretty much a lock for a given player since the drop in quality to the next in line is so bad. Competition for places is crucial to get the most out of a team.

[Detroit_TFC]

I would be very surprised if a 4th DP slot is added. I would not be surprised if the owners propose increasing the total number of players allowed on a roster along with an increase in the salary cap (ie, keep pressure on min sal remaining low) and that's where the players will have a serious problem.

[ag futbol]

The key to making this league stronger isn't adding more star power or big names, it's bringing up the calibre of bottom level player, and allowing for depth that is not semi-pro quality.

Depth is a big deal. Obviously it is needed for covering injuries and absences. If teams are to compete in the CL, they need depth to handle the extra games. But the side of depth that is seldom talked about is competition for places. Many players/positions are pretty much a lock for a given player since the drop in quality to the next in line is so bad. Competition for places is crucial to get the most out of a team.
Completely agree. They are already wasting money on 3 DP spots as it is. 1-2 should be sufficient, beyond that let's start paying for better regular players.

[brad]

I would be very surprised if a 4th DP slot is added. I would not be surprised if the owners propose increasing the total number of players allowed on a roster along with an increase in the salary cap (ie, keep pressure on min sal remaining low) and that's where the players will have a serious problem.

The only way I would see a 4th DP slot making sense is if it was some special slot to retain talent in the league. That, or when NYCFC want to sign their 4th David Villa caliber player :)

[Richard]

If there is one thing I want its transparency, its in the best interest if the union to bargain for thar too.

[Defoe]

The key to making this league stronger isn't adding more star power or big names, it's bringing up the calibre of bottom level player, and allowing for depth that is not semi-pro quality.

Depth is a big deal. Obviously it is needed for covering injuries and absences. If teams are to compete in the CL, they need depth to handle the extra games. But the side of depth that is seldom talked about is competition for places. Many players/positions are pretty much a lock for a given player since the drop in quality to the next in line is so bad. Competition for places is crucial to get the most out of a team.

I agree with brad. Maybe raising the salary cap (even doubling it) and keeping it at 3 dp slots is the best way to go.

[Detroit_TFC]

The only way I would see a 4th DP slot making sense is if it was some special slot to retain talent in the league. That, or when NYCFC want to sign their 4th David Villa caliber player :)

I agree, probably some sort of domestic (N.Amer) retention exception/cap discount.

As for the big owners exerting changes, that wouldn't be surprising at all. I don't know that NYCFC or the Brazilian financiers of Beckham's team want to bring in more superstars. I think they will want more decent bench players, many of which probably come in at the high end of the average salary range. That to me says salary cap increase rather than DP slots.

[portu]

I'd really like to see the following things in the next CBA

- A salary cap minimum of $4.5m and a maximum of $9m
- 3 DP slots with a cap hit of $1m each
- Minimum salary of $80k
- Transfer Fees not to count against cap
- All salaries count against cap
- Allocation order eliminated


It's time that MLS exposes the teams/owners that refuse to spend (i.e. Kraft) and that will be done through creating a minimum salary cap. The maximum salary cap allows ambitious teams to be bloody ambitious for once - I want to see MLS succeed in CONCACAF. Minimum salary just makes sense as paying players national averages ($39k) does not incentivize kids to go pro rather than go to college or pursue a different sport and 39k isn't enough for people to live off of.

[Initial B]

I disagree with raising the cap that much that fast. I see a lot of wage inflation compared to actual skill level involved. I would rather see all players get a straight $15-20K raise for the 2015 season, with a salary cap ceiling of $5-6 million (and a floor of $3 million). Then for every year of the agreement, raise the salary cap floor/ceiling and non-DP salaries by 10% per year through to the end of the CBA (probably 5 years, so 2019). It's the lowest wage players that really need the jump in Salaries. I think 2020 will be the year the salary cap breaks the $10M barrier and MLS will become a destination league.

[BuSaPuNk]

Minimum salary just makes sense as paying players national averages ($39k) does not incentivize kids to go pro rather than go to college or pursue a different sport and 39k isn't enough for people to live off of.

I wish I made $39k a year.

They can't take too much of a bump. They have to keep the salaries somewhat realistic. There's still teams bleeding money. Expanding too quickly will have dire consequences for clubs.

[Gazza_55]

Exactly, the Owner-Operators benefit twice.

1. They make a lot of money in SUM, which is not shown as earnings to the franchise much because most of the earnings aren't paid out as dividends.

2. They then claim a large tax-loss on their team franchise, which excludes the substantial TV revenues (under SUM) on the income side, and has phony, inflated (but legal) stadium depreciation on the cost side. They offset the tax-loss against their taxable income from their other businesses. Lowering taxes is just as good as bringing in more money, the result is the same.

The owner-operators then have the temerity to claim to the Player's Union that MLS is "losing money" based on their phony tax-losses. That's laughable, smart people don't pay $50-$100 million in franchise fees (plus stadium costs) to lose money.

Disagree with this post.

Why are the MLS players union entitled to a percentage of SUM? If they participate in SUM events they are paid for that. Unless ofcourse there were players who "INVESTED" in SUM back at it's inception. You know when no one had any clue it would be profitable. Lastly, stadium depreciation is just like building depreciation for any business.

[Pookie]

The league is not in a good position to allow a strike with their expansion plans while many lower end guys - who will be the focus of this, not DP slots - have very little to lose.

While that is true, the league is in a better position than the players are with respect to a strike as of right now.

Soccer is one of the few North American sports where replacement players would have little to no effect on the perceived quality of the game. There are a flood of players available on any given day. All MLS would have to do is temporarily relax its domestic player quotas and open the doors.

That said, I think that the Players' Union is nearing a time when a strike makes absolute success. Many legal analysts don't think MLS' current structure could survive an anti-trust suit. The nature of the league holding all the contracts with players and the board structure (with owner-operators having a seat on the board) arguably serves to reduce competition, hold player salaries down, and often dictates where players will play. Those practices would seemingly be restrictive in terms of labour movement.

As teams become more independent and the league gains a foothold, that's when I think the Union will turn it up. It may not be this time around. Their path to success (ie. free agency), comes when the league is strong and going the replacement player route makes no sense.

I suspect they will use anti-trust concerns this time around to parlay it into increased benefits such as raises in the minimum salaries, more guaranteed contracts, player benefits.

Next time, with established markets, bigger TV contracts and growth it is likely they will swing for the free agency fence and the threat of a strike will be real.

This thing has a timeline and it is headed where the Union wants it.

[ag futbol]

While that is true, the league is in a better position than the players are with respect to a strike as of right now.

Soccer is one of the few North American sports where replacement players would have little to no effect on the perceived quality of the game. There are a flood of players available on any given day. All MLS would have to do is temporarily relax its domestic player quotas and open the doors.

That said, I think that the Players' Union is nearing a time when a strike makes absolute success. Many legal analysts don't think MLS' current structure could survive an anti-trust suit. The nature of the league holding all the contracts with players and the board structure (with owner-operators having a seat on the board) arguably serves to reduce competition, hold player salaries down, and often dictates where players will play. Those practices would seemingly be restrictive in terms of labour movement.

As teams become more independent and the league gains a foothold, that's when I think the Union will turn it up. It may not be this time around. Their path to success (ie. free agency), comes when the league is strong and going the replacement player route makes no sense.

I suspect they will use anti-trust concerns this time around to parlay it into increased benefits such as raises in the minimum salaries, more guaranteed contracts, player benefits.

Next time, with established markets, bigger TV contracts and growth it is likely they will swing for the free agency fence and the threat of a strike will be real.

This thing has a timeline and it is headed where the Union wants it.
Considering they are going to be trying to sell the game in new markets, I completely disagree. They have to show people that it's an entertaining game and one of reasonable quality. Contrary to popular opinon, there aren't a mass of out of contract players sitting around who could readily replace MLS players on a temporary basis (key word: temporary).

There is more than enough meat to strike at right now for the players to make up ground. TV contract not required. Players seem very willing to strike as well. They got smoked last time and they knew it. Afterwords they went out and got heavy hitters from MLB and some other places. They wouldn't do that unless they were showing intent.

[Pookie]

^ how big is the war chest though this time around?

[Oldtimer]

Disagree with this post.

Why are the MLS players union entitled to a percentage of SUM? If they participate in SUM events they are paid for that. Unless ofcourse there were players who "INVESTED" in SUM back at it's inception. You know when no one had any clue it would be profitable. Lastly, stadium depreciation is just like building depreciation for any business.

MLS players are entitled to a share of SUM profits to the extent that it is related to MLS games. After all, it is the players that create the entertainment that the TV revenues come from. If it is Mexican league games (also broadcast by SUM), I totally agree with you.

As far as stadium depreciation, tax treatment in the US differs from Canada. In Canada, the government dictates how much you can write off every year (Capital Cost Allowance) which can differ greatly from the depreciation on the books.
In the US, bookkeeping depreciation is used. This gives a strong incentive to inflate the amount of depreciation in order to minimize taxes. Also in the US, you can write off unrelated businesses, so creating a tax loss to offset taxes on the profits of other arms of the business makes a lot of sense. Turning around and using these bogus figures in labour negotiations is absurd, however, these figures exist only to cut taxes. This doesn't happen in Canada due to the Capital Cost Allowance regime.

[notthesun]

On mobile so I won't link it but Twellman said on twitter he would be "shocked" if the next CBA doesn't see 4 DP slots and a 45-50% cap increase.

[Defoe]

On mobile so I won't link it but Twellman said on twitter he would be "shocked" if the next CBA doesn't see 4 DP slots and a 45-50% cap increase.

They should keep it at 3 Dp's and should just double the cap.

[ryan]

In the interest of parity, just double the cap. In the interest of big money TFC, MOAR DP'S!!!!!!!!

[Yohan]

Pretty good reads

Homegrown Player rule
http://www.brotherlygame.com/2014/5/21/5693176/mls-homegrown-player-rule-a-visual-guide

New TV deal
http://www.brotherlygame.com/2014/5/14/5711078/the-new-mls-tv-deal-how-it-impacts-the-union-and-fans

CBA negotiation
http://www.brotherlygame.com/2014/2/11/5392512/the-mls-cba-a-perspective-on-the-league-and-owners
http://www.brotherlygame.com/2014/4/1/5544564/the-mls-cba-a-point-of-view-on-player-salaries

[lazlo_80]

Just passively listening to podcasts, interviews, etc. I keep hearing 5 million cap and another DP slot keep coming up too much to think it's not just a coincidence.

[jloome]

Just passively listening to podcasts, interviews, etc. I keep hearing 5 million cap and another DP slot keep coming up too much to think it's not just a coincidence.

What's the international rule now? I've forgotten it's been so long since it was an issue. Three in the playing squad? They might increase that, too, if tempted by the sudden increase in the available talent pool after a wage hike.

[Pint]

If another DP slot is added I hope they put a contingency on it... either: Domestic, Young, or grown (player moving from regular contract to DP like zusi etc). The villa, lampard, defoes are nice for the league but the bradleys and gilberto/laba type signings are the ones that will move the league forward.

[Defoe]

If another DP slot is added I hope they put a contingency on it... either: Domestic, Young, or grown (player moving from regular contract to DP like zusi etc). The villa, lampard, defoes are nice for the league but the bradleys and gilberto/laba type signings are the ones that will move the league forward.

Exactly, there is no need for another DP slot. It makes no sense. Overall team quality 1-11 has to improve... the league has taken a backwards approach in adding "stars" before depth, which I'm not complaining about, but depth has to improve now. This article is a little older and since has added Defoe, Kaka, Bradley, Villa, Lampard etc... but just states the upper echelon players are higher then Liga MX.

http://www.thegoatparade.com/2013/4/18/4239378/maybe-mls-payrolls-arent-as-far-behind-liga-mxs-as-we-figured

[Shway]

Bezbatchenko said he expected the salary cap to rise US$1 million to $4 million after the next collective bargain agreement, allowing for more player investment.



Read more: http://www.cp24.com/sports/toronto-fc-news/tfc-gm-bezbatchenko-puts-faith-in-analytics-1.2007836#ixzz3DRm7CAzZ

This statement doesn't make sense.
Does this mean the cap will be somewhere around the ball park of 4M+, or an increase of 3 mil to the existing salary cap.

Heres hoping the salary cap is raised to at least 6mil, the league minimum is raised to 80k and no max salary, 5 DP's that salaries don't count to the cap, home grown players are not included in the cap, and CANADIANS ARE CONSIDER DOMESTIC LEAGUE WIDE

[Yohan]

This statement doesn't make sense.
Does this mean the cap will be somewhere around the ball park of 4M+, or an increase of 3 mil to the existing salary cap.

Heres hoping the salary cap is raised to at least 6mil, the league minimum is raised to 80k and no max salary, 5 DP's that salaries don't count to the cap, home grown players are not included in the cap, and CANADIANS ARE CONSIDER DOMESTIC LEAGUE WIDElol. wishful thinking

I read it as cap will be raised to 4 mil per team. add in allocation money spent on players and the cap will be around 4.5 mil per team, which is more realistic expectations.

[Initial B]

No, read it again.


Bezbatchenko said he expected the salary cap to rise $1-million to $4-million after the next collective bargain agreement, allowing for more player investment.

Bez is saying that he expects the salary cap to be set between $4.1 million to $7.1 million(!) for next season.

I can see why he doesn't want to spend more on longer contracts that could leave him handcuffed next year. It looks like the training wheels are finally coming off - MLS must be putting all their tv money into player salaries over the next 5 years. I can't see players complaining too much about that. A massive increase will probably buy off the players on other CBA issues like free agency and transfers.

[flamehawk]

No, read it again.



Bez is saying that he expects the salary cap to be set between $4.1 million to $7.1 million(!) for next season.

I can see why he doesn't want to spend more on longer contracts that could leave him handcuffed next year. It looks like the training wheels are finally coming off - MLS must be putting all their tv money into player salaries over the next 5 years. I can't see players complaining too much about that. A massive increase will probably buy off the players on other CBA issues like free agency and transfers.

Based on the quote and what I heard at the BBQ, it was definitely my impression that he meant the cap would be rising by 1m, ending up with each team having a cap of 4m (up from 3m). I'd be excited if it would be 7 but I really doubt it.

[Kaz]

Bezbatchenko said he expected the salary cap to rise $1-million. To $4-million after the next collective bargain agreement, allowing for more player investment. Fixed.

[ag futbol]

If true, it's an entirely different league next year. Although I suspect a lot of this will be stuffed under USL rosters.

[shwade]

5M+ salary cap is too good to be true. I read it as a raise of 1M for a $4M salary cap. Wish they would've gone bigger with this one...it would bring in MLS 3.0 a loy sooner.

[Richard]

The cap not going up significantly after all these good years of progress is a step backwards. I think the best way to do it would be to have the cap at 7-10m, with the first 4m covered by the league, that way you could actually get the teams with money to be able to create a good squad and challange in the CCL.

[Yohan]

The cap not going up significantly after all these good years of progress is a step backwards. I think the best way to do it would be to have the cap at 7-10m, with the first 4m covered by the league, that way you could actually get the teams with money to be able to create a good squad and challange in the CCL.
such an increase will improve the quality of the league, but with int spot limitations, a lot of what will happen is that the scrubs just end up making more money

[Yohan]

http://www.theguardian.com/football/2014/sep/16/dc-united-mls-re-entry-draft-veterans

some good read on re-entry draft

[C.Ronaldo]

such an increase will improve the quality of the league, but with int spot limitations, a lot of what will happen is that the scrubs just end up making more money


they want scrubs that left to euro and mexico to come back

[C.Ronaldo]

This statement doesn't make sense.
Does this mean the cap will be somewhere around the ball park of 4M+, or an increase of 3 mil to the existing salary cap.

Heres hoping the salary cap is raised to at least 6mil, the league minimum is raised to 80k and no max salary, 5 DP's that salaries don't count to the cap, home grown players are not included in the cap, and CANADIANS ARE CONSIDER DOMESTIC LEAGUE WIDE

the power of a comma!

[Initial B]

Based on the quote and what I heard at the BBQ, it was definitely my impression that he meant the cap would be rising by 1m, ending up with each team having a cap of 4m (up from 3m). I'd be excited if it would be 7 but I really doubt it.

Ah, the nuance of vocal tones. Well, that still about what we considered to be the most likely scenario in the salary cap poll (http://forums.redpatchboys.ca/showthread.php?34914-MLS-Salary-Cap-Poll). Still, If the new CBA keeps increasing the salary by 5% per year, that's still too slow for my taste, as a $4mil cap in 2015 will be only a $4.86mil cap by 2019. I'd much rather see the cap raised to $4.5-5mil, with with a 5%/yr increase would result in 2019 caps of $5.46mil or $6.07mil respectively. That would make it much a less drastic hit when they raise the cap to $7-10million in the following CBA.

I'm assuming the CBA will run 5 years, but doesn't the TV agreement run 8 years? I'm not liking that since that allows the owners to cry poor to the players again in the next CBA. I'd really like to see all the non-DP players in the league get a blanket $20K raise each (which would add $600K to each team roster). It's not that much more to players at the high-end of the pay-scale, but it would a 50% increase in pay for those at the lowest end of the pay scale and help offset some of the salary inequity complaints. Am I the only one who thinks the players should be paid more?

<edited for grammar and spelling>

[pdubs]

such an increase will improve the quality of the league, but with int spot limitations, a lot of what will happen is that the scrubs just end up making more money

Exactly. How many domestics are actually worth a huge pay increase? Or what domestic talent can be replaced at higher wages/quality? I think minimum for players need to rise drastically ($75,000 instead of $45,000 for example and then the question of how many players make league minimum and how would almost doubling it affect the overall cap figuring in homegrown player rules and generation Adidas rules) but for example Ashton Morgan shouldn't be entitled to double his wage because he is a domestic and we have a ton of cap room to fill at say 7-10million.

International player quality should go up with a cap that high but I think it would leave a large majority of domestic talent being bench warmers or overpaid based on their quality. Making tighter regulations on what is deemed a domestic would help that but then to fill such a high cap of 7-10million we end up with the overpaid domestic player problem. It could lure more American domestics back to MLS but is their enough of them to go around? Surely there are not enough Canadians at this time that have enough quality to demand high wages.

A talent like Osorio would benefit because if he starts maximizing his potential instead of going to Europe he could potential have a nice non DP wage. Therefore we could assume actually DP theresholds would be higher and potential attract more elite players (Or again overpay even more for over-the-hill DP's)

I think MLS is taking the stance as domestic talent increases (another convo on how to measure such a thing ) then the none DP cap should increase in line with this. Clearly they are being conservative and I don't necessarily think this is a bad thing based on what is outlined above.

very good convo to have tho. Will be interesting to watch the proceedings.

[Defoe]

2 international spots need to be added and the minimum should rise to maybe 55k max. I'm sorry Osorio that is all your worth. If it raises only 1 million, it will be hard to improve overall quality that much within the next 2-3 years. The difference of that extra 1-2 million is huge. I'm hoping for 6... wouldn't be mad with 5. At 4 million I would be pretty dissapointed... The difference between 4 and 5 million is the difference of an extra 2 quality south American players like a Valeri and Laba. Our lineup fully healthy with Laba, Valeri and another quality talent is the difference between a quality team that would be enjoyable to watch that could probably do very well in concacaf vs a team that is still in the beginning stages and hard to watch... I support my local team no matter what but it would be nice to actually enjoy the game sooner rather then later. A 5 million dollar cap should be the goal, that would be a huge step forward. I think they should focus on adding more south American talent. The lack of Americans is not a problem at all... Dempsey, Jones, Bradley, Zusi etc get all the headlines anyways. We need the help from south America, so take it... put out a better product, increase the quality, and it will lead to more interest across both countries.

[Yohan]

just to reiterate, MLS player's union's priority is not raising the salary cap. rather, it's over min wages, free agency and player benefits.

MLS FO will raise the salary cap because of other reasons, but it won't be mainly due to MLSPU demands it

[ag futbol]

2 international spots need to be added and the minimum should rise to maybe 55k max.
55k is not going to attract the type of talent that thrives is professional sports. Right now, there are plenty of guys who will take Europe based on equal money and greater visibility or just give up on the game rather than go through this drudgery. Money may cause overpayment of domestics in short term but will draw talent in the long run. Internationals can't solve the lack of domestic talent, which this league needs to draw more attention to the product.

[Defoe]

55k is not going to attract the type of talent that thrives is professional sports. Right now, there are plenty of guys who will take Europe based on equal money and greater visibility or just give up on the game rather than go through this drudgery. Money may cause overpayment of domestics in short term but will draw talent in the long run. Internationals can't solve the lack of domestic talent, which this league needs to draw more attention to the product.

What does the 55 K basement salary have to do with attracting talent? The only number any player is concerned about is their own specific salary, so if the median is high, then there is no problem. You need a low 55k minimum salary for guys on the bench - at least for the next CBA. America/Canada have quite a bit of talent overseas right now as well... Canada alone have guys like De Jong, Jackson, Edgar, Borjan, Hutchinson and others that would do well in MLS, and that isn't a stretch. If you can increase the level of play overall and increase the median salary, I would think some of these domestic players will start chosing MLS. If the cap raises 2 million, this league could take a massive step forward.

[OgtheDim]

You need a low 55k minimum salary for guys on the bench - at least for the next CBA...

You might not have noticed, but it can be argued that of the starters on Saturday, only Morrow, Bloom, Gilberto, Oduro and Bradley would have never been "guys on the bench" for us at some point this season.

Bench depth is how MLS is going to get better.

[ag futbol]

What does the 55 K basement salary have to do with attracting talent? The only number any player is concerned about is their own specific salary, so if the median is high, then there is no problem. You need a low 55k minimum salary for guys on the bench - at least for the next CBA. America/Canada have quite a bit of talent overseas right now as well... Canada alone have guys like De Jong, Jackson, Edgar, Borjan, Hutchinson and others that would do well in MLS, and that isn't a stretch. If you can increase the level of play overall and increase the median salary, I would think some of these domestic players will start chosing MLS. If the cap raises 2 million, this league could take a massive step forward.
Disagree. This league needs depth to increase competition for starting 11 places. It also needs to attract better quality prospects to sit on farm teams.

That's better bang for your buck than repatriating most of guys you listed above.

[Defoe]

yes but as of now we don't have that luxury... that can be addressed in the next CBA in 5 years. Raising it now would only mean doubling Lovitz, Hagglund, Osorio and Morgan's salary when we don't have too

[Kaz]

Ya it would.. it would also mean keeping Academy players that might end up in Europe over the next 5 years.... specifically it might mean kids who would go to Europe at 14/16 and give up their Canadian Citizenship might stay... DeGuzman for example

[Phil]

yes but as of now we don't have that luxury... that can be addressed in the next CBA in 5 years. Raising it now would only mean doubling Lovitz, Hagglund, Osorio and Morgan's salary when we don't have too

We doubled Osorio's salary last year ;)

[OgtheDim]

Some speculation that the 4th DP will be a mandated domestic.

[Yohan]

http://www.goal.com/en-ke/news/4631/soccerex/2014/10/13/5179973/latest-mls-salary-data-indicates-continued-slow-and-steady

we already knew but TFC really sucks at this moneyball thing

[Yohan]

If Bendik, the TFC union rep's words are anything to go by, should be a very... interesting off season. Looks like MLSPU is gearing up for a fight against MLS.

[T-boy]

I'm still putting money on a strike situtation - the MLS reputation has really increased since the last bargaining, and the players/union will know it, and will want to get there cut. I can't see it being a clean cut negotations this time unfortunately.

[Initial B]

MLS may bypass a strike by giving the low-end players a $20K raise to reduce the income gap between the highest and lowest in the league. All the owners would have to do would be to raise the entry salary from $36.5K to $55K to be able to say, "Look how good we are! We lowered the salary gap by 37 percent! We care about our Players!!" The pressure from the low-level players should allow the owners to get away with restricting player movement for another 5 years at least.

[Red I]

Bendik mentioned free agency as another point of conflict - is that basically a jab at the single entity structure of the league and contracts being with the player and the league, not between the player and the teams?

[Ajax TFC]

Bendik mentioned free agency as another point of conflict - is that basically a jab at the single entity structure of the league and contracts being with the player and the league, not between the player and the teams?
Almost certainly. Free agency in this league almost doesn't exist, and the free agency that does exist is for players that no team wants for anywhere near their current salary. In other words, free agency is free agency for the teams, not the players.

[Richard]

Free agency is a huge thing for me, the allocation order nonsense needs to be scrapped and let teams own the contracts. I don't think it will happen during these negations but the seeds will be planted, I expect huge resistance from the league but it will come 5 years from now.

[OgtheDim]

Free Agency?


That's Cosmos talk. 70's thinking! Pele! Splutter...wheeze.... cough!
:willy_nilly::willy_nilly::willy_nilly:

[Yohan]

Free agency is a huge thing for me, the allocation order nonsense needs to be scrapped and let teams own the contracts. I don't think it will happen during these negations but the seeds will be planted, I expect huge resistance from the league but it will come 5 years from now.
single entity will never go away. it's one of the things that makes MLS attractive to investors. there will not be any run away wage inflation

[Oldtimer]

Free Agency?


That's Cosmos talk. 70's thinking! Pele! Splutter...wheeze.... cough!
:willy_nilly::willy_nilly::willy_nilly:

Exactly. Bring in what bankrupted the old NASL? It will never, ever, happen, except maybe in a very limited way.

[Richard]

single entity will never go away. it's one of the things that makes MLS attractive to investors. there will not be any run away wage inflation

That's what you have a salary cap for? Free agency isn't a new concept, the teams in this league could handle if it gets to what Garber is suggesting about a being a top league in the world.

[ag futbol]

I'm still putting money on a strike situtation - the MLS reputation has really increased since the last bargaining, and the players/union will know it, and will want to get there cut. I can't see it being a clean cut negotations this time unfortunately.
Not only that but Two new expansion teams coming in, they know a strike will not help those markets.

Call me a cynic, but all these farm team signings we're seeing by the league is probably being done to dilute the resolve of the MLSPU. New guys are unlikely to have the same resolve the vet domestics, who are most likely leading the charge.

[Yohan]

That's what you have a salary cap for? Free agency isn't a new concept, the teams in this league could handle if it gets to what Garber is suggesting about a being a top league in the world.
with a such a low salary cap, free agency will reduce the quality of the league because teams will fight over few good free agents and end up signing him on a high wage, leaving not much for the rest of the team.

[ag futbol]

single entity will never go away. it's one of the things that makes MLS attractive to investors. there will not be any run away wage inflation
The league has entered a new period but still is shackled by its previous near death experiences. They need to be more forward thinking and less myopic. The facade of single entity will eventually crack with expansion. Your Seattles, TFCs, LAs, and NYs are going to have major issues with revenue sharing and being anchored by these small market teams, many of which are under invested in and where the owners have little incentive to improve because of the free ride of shared ownership.

Wage increases for regular players have barely topped inflation. MLS continues to leak talent to places that it shouldn't. The league is over-marketed and quality is improved but still underwhelming.

They need a new model and shouldn't take the public's interest in the game currently for granted. Things change, trends come and go, some markets never develop when companies fail to capitalize.

The vision the league had 5 years ago made sense given the environment they were in. It no longer makes sense and needs to change.

[Pookie]

How does one have Free Agency when all the contracts are held by one entity? Practically speaking, how does one team negotiate against another team when neither actually pays the bill?

Free Agency only comes from challenging MLS' Anti-trust status, IMO. Contracts would have to be held with each individual team.

The power for the Union comes from using the threat of challenging that status and parlaying it into increased wages for its domestic players and other elements like guaranteed contracts, etc. I'm not sure that the end game this time around would be free agency.

[Yohan]

How does one have Free Agency when all the contracts are held by one entity? Practically speaking, how does one team negotiate against another team when neither actually pays the bill?

Free Agency only comes from challenging MLS' Anti-trust status, IMO. Contracts would have to be held with each individual team.

The power for the Union comes from using the threat of challenging that status and parlaying it into increased wages for its domestic players and other elements like guaranteed contracts, etc. I'm not sure that the end game this time around would be free agency.
MLSPU already challenged MLS's single entity in 2000 IIRC. They lost.

Single entity will be around forever, unless MLS decides to go otherwise

[ag futbol]

MLSPU already challenged MLS's single entity in 2000 IIRC. They lost.

Single entity will be around forever, unless MLS decides to go otherwise
From my understanding they didn't lose, they dropped the case before it came to conclusion. That's important, because they can still bring it up again.

Edit: Actually, I stand corrected. MLS did actually win the case outright. However, that doesn't preclude them from bringing it up again on different grounds.

[Pookie]

MLSPU already challenged MLS's single entity in 2000 IIRC. They lost.

Single entity will be around forever, unless MLS decides to go otherwise

Not exactly. The MLS Player's Union wasn't formed until 2003. The legal challenge you refer to was a group of players that sought to challenge it and the courts, though siding in MLS' favour at the time have left doors open.

Some 12-14 years later, the argument that MLS continues to operate as a single entity is losing a lot of steam. For example:

- each team employs its own Managers/Technical Directors/Director of Soccer and has its own scouting staff to varying degrees
- they draft independently
- they promote and develop from their own independent Academies
- they compete for the services of Designated Players and compensate them differently
- they can make "Discovery Signing" claims, effectively bringing labour services to their organization
- they select players at their own discretion from the Waiver/Re-entry draft

If the MLSPU wanted to challenge the MLS' claim on Single Entity, they would likely find success. MLS' current structure whereby all contracts are held with the league clearly limits and restricts labour movement. It also follows that teams clearly have the ability to act independently and in the examples above do act in such a way.

The real question is whether the Union wants to take this on or wants to leverage the status quo to extract more for its members.

[ensco]

I'll kick this off - I think the only way this gets settled fast is if MLS caves and has a huge increase in the cap.

Otherwise the players are out for months. Too much disparity. Remember how the De Guzman/Dero thing destroyed our room? This is happenng league wide now.

I say they restart September 1, with a Euro calendar - one like Germany, with an even longer Xmas break, and maybe like Mexico, with an Apertura/Clausura.

[jloome]

I'll kick this off - I think the only way this gets settled fast is if MLS caves and has a huge increase in the cap.

Otherwise the players are out for months. Too much disparity. Remember how the De Guzman/Dero thing destroyed our room? This is happenng league wide now.

I say they restart September 1, with a Euro calendar - one like Germany, with an even longer Xmas break, and maybe like Mexico, with an Apertura/Clausura.

Apparently Taylor Twellman (who has exceptional sources) is reporting the league might move to five DPs per club; he said a month or so ago that they're also considering a significant cap increase, something like $3.5 million per. Pretty game changing if true; five top-level internationals per club really ups the profile, and MLS already gets a break on that front just by being in the U.S., which tends to fascinate others (they play MLS games every week in the U.K. now).

[Kayaker]

While I think your scenario is possible, there is one factor weighing against it. The TV contract in the US kicks in for next season and I've heard that the reason that it is so much larger than the previous contract (some have said that they are over paying) is the explicit instructions to MLS is to pay the players more (i.e. get better players).

Both sides know this, but the union wants to bring up the lower paid players (and I can't disagree with this) and the league doesn't want to just pay more for the existing talent level. How they balance off larger revenues, larger salary caps (both are a forgone conclusion) and who gets the money will be the main sticking points.

I haven't heard of any negotiations happening yet, but that doesn't mean that it hasn't begun already. Post MLS cup up to the Super Draft will indicate whether it will be quickly resolved. If not, your scenario may come about.

[ensco]

Apparently Taylor Twellman (who has exceptional sources) is reporting the league might move to five DPs per club; he said a month or so ago that they're also considering a significant cap increase, something like $3.5 million per. Pretty game changing if true; five top-level internationals per club really ups the profile, and MLS already gets a break on that front just by being in the U.S., which tends to fascinate others (they play MLS games every week in the U.K. now).

Without free agency, that wins no votes in the union membership. That allows MLS to bring in more names (Michael Essien, for arguments sake) but does nothing for the 90% of existing membership that don't think they are getting a fair shake under existing rules.

If they also allowed true free agency as part of that, and the cap went to $5M, I think that deal could get approved in February.

[Pint]

No chance the league wants to delay NYC FC and Orlando arrival. Villa, lampard and kaka all joining at the same time.

[prizby]

Apparently Taylor Twellman (who has exceptional sources) is reporting the league might move to five DPs per club; he said a month or so ago that they're also considering a significant cap increase, something like $3.5 million per. Pretty game changing if true; five top-level internationals per club really ups the profile, and MLS already gets a break on that front just by being in the U.S., which tends to fascinate others (they play MLS games every week in the U.K. now).

is that cap to $3.5M or an increase of $3.5M; I wouldn't call a 400k increase significant when it's been going up about 200k a year

[Richard]

No chance the league wants to delay NYC FC and Orlando arrival. Villa, lampard and kaka all joining at the same time.

That's actually a really good point. All the power is in the unions hands to be honest, MLS just backed themselves into a corner in this negotiation by having these teams and players coming all at once.

That TV deal rumor does sound intriguing if its also true.

[ensco]

No chance the league wants to delay NYC FC and Orlando arrival. Villa, lampard and kaka all joining at the same time.

"The league" is the owners.

There has been a dilution of ownership for sure as richer newbies have come in, but is it enough to offset the traditionalists (Hunts, Krafts, Anschutz) that run this league historically? I doubt it.

Don't forget, there has been a backlash against the spending. TFC didn't exactly prove the case that it's a good idea. Even in preseason, there were a lot of unhappy campers.
http://www.mlssoccer.com/news/article/2014/02/08/tim-leiweke-fires-back-after-philadelphia-union-ceo-nick-sakiewicz-questions

[Ossington Mental Youth]

is that cap to $3.5M or an increase of $3.5M; I wouldn't call a 400k increase significant when it's been going up about 200k a year


HAHAHA i wondered the same thing

[jloome]

HAHAHA i wondered the same thing

It's double the prescribed rate and means an average possible salary across the roster of more than $100,000, so it's a positive step. They're not going to get free agency, unless it's with a heavy years of service caveat (like, at the end of a four year contract) and they don't have a restraint argument because it's the only div. 1 league in North America.

[OgtheDim]

Not many owner hawks left around.

Hunts only have 1 team now, AEG has 2. Kraft has 1.

That's 4 out of 19.

Who else is a hawk? Kronke? RSL?


Nah......$ talks and the $ coming into this league is not interested in losing out a season. Free agency won't happen but the cap goes up a lot.

[OgtheDim]

Does anybody know if players get more money for being in the playoffs, or is that just part of their contracts?

Cause they are thinking of adding 2 teams.

http://www.si.com/soccer/planet-futbol/2014/11/29/mls-cup-playoff-format-2015-changes

[ensco]

Not many owner hawks left around.

Hunts only have 1 team now, AEG has 2. Kraft has 1.

That's 4 out of 19.

Who else is a hawk? Kronke? RSL?


Nah......$ talks and the $ coming into this league is not interested in losing out a season. Free agency won't happen but the cap goes up a lot.

Upon reflection, I'd rephrase. I think there are a lot of teams that just don't have the revenue potential to pay more for players, DPs or otherwise, that is the real split amongst the owners.

This chart shows what I mean:

http://www.stathunting.com/2014/04/11/mls-salaries-visualized/

[Ajax TFC]

Both sides know this, but the union wants to bring up the lower paid players (and I can't disagree with this) and the league doesn't want to just pay more for the existing talent level.
While it's true that in the short term all you would be doing is paying the same quality of domestic talent more money; in the long term more talented athletes will pursue a career in soccer rather than something that pays better. Though the average salary of soccer players here would have to go up a lot for it to compete with the other major sports for talented athletes

[Pookie]

My view is that the Union will do everything short of going the anti-trust route to gain ground for the players.

I see free agency as the issue they agree to leave off the table in exchange for financial gains for the domestic player. Higher salaries and guaranteed contracts for younger players will likely be earned in exchange for dropping free agency demands... this time around.

[Oldtimer]

If the MLSPU wanted to challenge the MLS' claim on Single Entity, they would likely find success. MLS' current structure whereby all contracts are held with the league clearly limits and restricts labour movement. It also follows that teams clearly have the ability to act independently and in the examples above do act in such a way.



I actually think that the players would lose. Plus, they have little to gain from an antitrust lawsuit and blowing up the league. Incremental change works for everyone when you are talking about MLS, whether it is in TV deals, sponsorships, extending the DP rules, or players' rights. If you look how players have it now compared to 2002, it's way, way better. Killing the proverbial "golden goose" benefits no one, neither would a protracted strike.

[Initial B]

I think the league realizes that the player salaries need to go up. And really, raising the minimum salaries to $50K/$65K with about a $16K increase to all non-DP players will only add about $500K to the cap. If the reports are correct and the Salary Cap is raised to $4 million, then that still leaves an additional $400K for teams to play around with to get better talent. Personally, I'd like to see a $5 million cap, but don't know if that's in the cards. I think it should at least be $4.5 million and raise the salaries and cap by 5% per year through to the end of the CBA. By 2020, I expect the gloves to be off and serious player salaries being offered.

[Ossington Mental Youth]

It's double the prescribed rate and means an average possible salary across the roster of more than $100,000, so it's a positive step. They're not going to get free agency, unless it's with a heavy years of service caveat (like, at the end of a four year contract) and they don't have a restraint argument because it's the only div. 1 league in North America.

grazie. Figured as much re salaries etc.

[ag futbol]

This league is still anchored to its lean years. It needs to change it's mentality if it's ever going to reach it's potential. I'm way more likely to be annoyed by yet another semi-pro RB earning 40k a year than I am impressed by whatever it is that we "had" to spend our money on for a fourth DP.

[Beach_Red]

This league is still anchored to its lean years. It needs to change it's mentality if it's ever going to reach it's potential. I'm way more likely to be annoyed by yet another semi-pro RB earning 40k a year than I am impressed by whatever it is that we "had" to spend our money on for a fourth DP.

Maybe it has.

[Canary10]

What's the incentive for owners to band together to increase their costs (ie. player salaries)? I'm sure one of the attractions of MLS for owners is that its players costs are well below almost anything else out there.

[Cas87]

What's the incentive for owners to band together to increase their costs (ie. player salaries)? I'm sure one of the attractions of MLS for owners is that its players costs are well below almost anything else out there.

I am sure that most of the owners realize that in order to make the league as profitable as possible, they need in increase their costs (at least to a certain point).

MLS doesn't want to turn into the second-coming of the original NASL (where costs went too high to sustain the league).

[Canary10]

I am sure that most of the owners realize that in order to make the league as profitable as possible, they need in increase their costs (at least to a certain point).

MLS doesn't want to turn into the second-coming of the original NASL (where costs went too high to sustain the league).

To a certain point, yeah, but I think it's going to be very gradual. The model is pretty good right now if you are an owner. Where in professional sports, especially in soccer, can you pay a whole team $4-5 million?

[C.Ronaldo]

I actually think that the players would lose. Plus, they have little to gain from an antitrust lawsuit and blowing up the league. Incremental change works for everyone when you are talking about MLS, whether it is in TV deals, sponsorships, extending the DP rules, or players' rights. If you look how players have it now compared to 2002, it's way, way better. Killing the proverbial "golden goose" benefits no one, neither would a protracted strike.


2002 and 2014 players arent the same guys

this lot is negotating for this term and for a lot of guys it is their last or near last term.

[ag futbol]

Maybe it has.
Fair point.

And while this goes against my original assertion, I have to say on some grounds they really have abandoned things that worked so well earlier. SSS was a big push, but now largely irrelevant.

The current expansion looks NHL sunbelt esque in some ways. The markets are good but the business plans are all out of whack; looks like it's motivated by expansion dollars.

[ensco]

North American big cities are trained on having world class players playing their sports.

The cap negotiation minutiae obscures the reality of just how far this league is from even being middling.

I look at MLS TV ratings, and I don't see how this league can ever afford to have the $20-25M payroll it would take just to have a Mexican or Dutch level team.

MLS becoming a big league is not possible.

[Beach_Red]

Fair point.

And while this goes against my original assertion, I have to say on some grounds they really have abandoned things that worked so well earlier. SSS was a big push, but now largely irrelevant.

The current expansion looks NHL sunbelt esque in some ways. The markets are good but the business plans are all out of whack; looks like it's motivated by expansion dollars.

Yeah, I'm not happy about it but that's what it looks like. It seems that too many of the owners have taken the MLSE approach, that is; soccer is the most popular sport in the world here fore it will be popular here. Inevitably. But, or course, North America is an incredibly competitive market for team sports and the other leagues don't just roll over and die.

I don't think MLS really had many options but they never really seemed to decide if they were going after existing North American sports fans - so they structured the league like every other league with divisions and playoffs and a draft and so on - or if they felt there were enough soccer fans already here just waiting for a league to support and it's ended up somewhere in between with no real identity.

[jloome]

Yeah, I'm not happy about it but that's what it looks like. It seems that too many of the owners have taken the MLSE approach, that is; soccer is the most popular sport in the world here fore it will be popular here. Inevitably. But, or course, North America is an incredibly competitive market for team sports and the other leagues don't just roll over and die.

I don't think MLS really had many options but they never really seemed to decide if they were going after existing North American sports fans - so they structured the league like every other league with divisions and playoffs and a draft and so on - or if they felt there were enough soccer fans already here just waiting for a league to support and it's ended up somewhere in between with no real identity.

I don't think it's quite as extreme in terms of how far off reality they are; I think you're assuming they expect to be top dog some day, when in reality, MLS would be quite happy to double its current fanbase by roping in people from the diaspora melting pot who won't support anyone but a team from the old country. They'd be happy to be pushing out NHL for an overall fanbase in the long run.

ANd it's possible; to me, the bigger issue is how that vision will affect the U.S. and Canadian player base; there's simply no way that American technical development at the youth level is keeping pace with the growth of the league; the further the divide, the more any growth will rely on bringing in foreigners, increasing the cap and risking losing the benefit a large write-off machine like an MLS club provides.

I think it's important to frame any discussion of MLS and expansion and the cap with the reality: this is a write-down project for most of the companies involved. Most are in the U.S. where a losing proposition hold long-term benefits to other parts of their business. But if they actually have to start competing, and taking on risk that doesn't benefit other holdings, that goes out the window. Will they go to a $5 mill cap and four DPs? Maybe. They let Toronto blow $100M in long-term spending this year; but much beyond that, it's difficult to see in the current market.

[Pookie]

What's the incentive for owners to band together to increase their costs (ie. player salaries)? I'm sure one of the attractions of MLS for owners is that its players costs are well below almost anything else out there.

I think we all have to remember that we are talking about a single entity here where salary expenses are generally not the responsibility of the individual teams.

If Columbus was on its own and paying out of its own pocket surely they would want to keep costs low. They would argue for strict caps in order to keep costs low to allow them to be competitive.

But outside of DPs, and those special "league funds" that can be used to get DPs, salaries are paid by the league.

If the league wants to assign everyone a set budget, and inflate the budget of certain teams to fit more expensive players into it.. which it does via allocation money... it can.

There may not be an incentive to increase expenses across the board but clearly there may be a business incentive for certain large markets to be competitive. Ticket sales, TV rights, etc all contribute to league profitability. All franchise operators have a share in MLS and arguably an interest in seeing the league do well financially. So there is an incentive it would appear for the collective investors to at least consider increasing expenses in some markets.

[OgtheDim]

... there's simply no way that American technical development at the youth level is keeping pace with the growth of the league... .

Rich people funded academies are by and large what are creating NBA players now (that and genetics); turns out that playing on an asphalt court doesn't do the job anymore if you want to be good enough. Same thing is developing in soccer.

[ag futbol]

I don't think it's quite as extreme in terms of how far off reality they are; I think you're assuming they expect to be top dog some day, when in reality, MLS would be quite happy to double its current fanbase by roping in people from the diaspora melting pot who won't support anyone but a team from the old country. They'd be happy to be pushing out NHL for an overall fanbase in the long run.

Forget the old country, MLS isn't able to sustain ratings that match the USMNT or EPL currently. Clearly they haven't been able to sell everyone on the quality of the product.

[Detroit_TFC]

Wage restraint is a negotiating tactic more than a long term strategy like it was in the past. For most of these new owners, they may follow the direction of the league management in maintaining the status quo for now but that won't last long. Maybe not this CBA but by the next one, it may be a different mix of people calling the shots. Also, Don Garber isn't that old but he's been in place since 1999, he's not going to stay forever. At some point he leaves and that will bring some of these underlying strategic differences among the owners to the top.

[brad]

Forget the old country, MLS isn't able to sustain ratings that match the USMNT or EPL currently. Clearly they haven't been able to sell everyone on the quality of the product.

Well, that is no surprise, the quality is poor compared to alternatives. And it will continue to be as long as the roster and salary restrictions are where they are.

[Beach_Red]

Well, that is no surprise, the quality is poor compared to alternatives. And it will continue to be as long as the roster and salary restrictions are where they are.

It's always going to be a risk, though. No matter how high the quality gets in MLS the best it can be is "one of the top leagues in the world," which may always be a marketing issue in the USA competing against "the top league in the world" in every other sport.

If you build it they will come may not always be true.

[brad]

It's always going to be a risk, though. No matter how high the quality gets in MLS the best it can be is "one of the top leagues in the world," which may always be a marketing issue in the USA competing against "the top league in the world" in every other sport.

If you build it they will come may not always be true.

I don't disagree, but I think the fundamental problem right now is that bar is too low. And it will continue to be as long as teams a fielding journeymen at fullback, or are one or two key injuries away from having a massive drop in quality.

There will always be people that will only watch a top product. But there are also a lot of folks turned off by how fundamentally bad a lot of the games are. Watching the MLS - you miss a lot of basic stuff that is done at lower levels overseas. Specific to TFC - I know a lot of people personally that would have stuck with TFC if the quality had been better. And don't mean top quality - I mean stuff like - "why the hell are the players following the ball around like a bunch of kids" or "why are the players passing the ball and not moving into space".

[Beach_Red]

I don't disagree, but I think the fundamental problem right now is that bar is too low. And it will continue to be as long as teams a fielding journeymen at fullback, or are one or two key injuries away from having a massive drop in quality.

There will always be people that will only watch a top product. But there are also a lot of folks turned off by how fundamentally bad a lot of the games are. Watching the MLS - you miss a lot of basic stuff that is done at lower levels overseas. Specific to TFC - I know a lot of people personally that would have stuck with TFC if the quality had been better. And don't mean top quality - I mean stuff like - "why the hell are the players following the ball around like a bunch of kids" or "why are the players passing the ball and not moving into space".

Well, yes, a lot of this does seem specific to TFC. Some teams have raised the quality.

Also, the NBA and NFL really benefitted from the popularity of their sports at the college level which isn't happening with soccer.

[Kamp Berg]

Interesting piece concerning Canadian players in the league

http://www.canadiansoccernews.com/index.php?/page/articles.html/_/24th-minute/the-csa-mls-and-the-canada-question-r4977

[East York]

Did anyone post this yet, regarding the MLS state of the union address and 100 million in losses. Sorry if it's already posted. This is not good news, even if it's part of the CBA posturing.
http://www.sportsnet.ca/soccer/garber-claims-mls-is-financially-underperforming/

[Richard]

Did anyone post this yet, regarding the MLS state of the union address and 100 million in losses. Sorry if it's already posted. This is not good news, even if it's part of the CBA posturing.
http://www.sportsnet.ca/soccer/garber-claims-mls-is-financially-underperforming/

The league isn't loosing $100 million, this is just typical posturing by the commissioner before any CBA negotiation where the owners cry poor so they don't have pay players more.

Problem being:

1. New TV deal will increase revenue
2. Lineup of individual and ownership groups waiting to buy a team
3 Lineup of teams looking to expand into MLS
4. MLS has to increase salary significantly to make any headway in the NA market, MLS knows this.

There is a backlog of teams waiting to get in MLS, no league that's loosing money would have this much of a demand.

[Initial B]

I don't get Garber sometimes. How can you say the league lost $100M when the franchise valuations have tripled over the past 5 years in most cases?

[Oldtimer]

Did anyone post this yet, regarding the MLS state of the union address and 100 million in losses. Sorry if it's already posted. This is not good news, even if it's part of the CBA posturing.
http://www.sportsnet.ca/soccer/garber-claims-mls-is-financially-underperforming/

When Don Garber quotes "losses," you have to remember that those figures exclude TV Revenue (which the MLS owner/operators have in a separate company called Soccer United Marketing) and include artificially inflated stadium depreciation costs (used under U.S. tax law to justify tax write-offs). MLS Investors are smart people. They don't compete with one another for the chance to spend $80-100 million dollars in franchise fees plus many millions more in stadium costs just to lose $5 million per year (1/20th of $100 million). The figures are completely bogus, and they should be embarrassed to trot out such stuff!

The players see what teams are spending and they are not stupid enough to believe that the investors in MLS are just doing it out of a sense of largess for the US and Canadian soccer communities.


Garber attributed losses to player acquisitions, stadiums and spending on league infrastructure.

You see, he is including capital costs here. Remember that when you spend on capital costs, you are obtaining an asset (i.e. a stadium that you can use for more than MLS matches) in return.

[Yohan]

Did anyone post this yet, regarding the MLS state of the union address and 100 million in losses. Sorry if it's already posted. This is not good news, even if it's part of the CBA posturing.
http://www.sportsnet.ca/soccer/garber-claims-mls-is-financially-underperforming/
http://www.forbes.com/sites/prishe/2014/12/03/why-100-million-in-combined-losses-should-not-deter-further-expansion-of-major-league-soccer/

read this

[East York]

http://www.forbes.com/sites/prishe/2014/12/03/why-100-million-in-combined-losses-should-not-deter-further-expansion-of-major-league-soccer/

read this

this is reads like a Pyrmid scheme. He was nuts announcing the losses, real or fake, because when you talk to dis tractors of the league, one of the concerns, is MLS is in fact run like a Pyrmid scheme and that it can't go on forever, living off expansion fee's. He announces the 100 million in loses, just days after reporting only 2 teams made money in 2014, stupid

[Detroit_TFC]

Solid piece on the upcoming CBA negotiations by Brian Strauss of SI:

http://www.si.com/planet-futbol/2014/12/04/mls-players-union-cba-negotiations-don-garber-free-agency

[ensco]

Solid piece on the upcoming CBA negotiations by Brian Strauss of SI:

http://www.si.com/planet-futbol/2014/12/04/mls-players-union-cba-negotiations-don-garber-free-agency

To each his own. Not that solid for me. Lots of flowery metaphors. Not sure he shed much light on the issues.

All sports labour disputes turn ultimately on owner solidarity. Are the MLS owners going to hang tough, or not?

[Detroit_TFC]

To each his own. Not that solid for me. Lots of flowery metaphors. Not sure he shed much light on the issues.

All sports labour disputes turn ultimately on owner solidarity. Are the MLS owners going to hang tough, or not?

Neither side is going to drop any specifics to the press at this point. That will come later.

[ag futbol]

Sounds like nothing but posturing to me. The picture of the rabid quest for expansion dollars and plenty of owners willing to buy-in makes this $100M story either blatantly false or intentionally misleading.

[Super]

Hmm, I'm not sure how to respond to the league losing $100 million last year - except to say that if that's indeed the case, then maybe it's time to replace management. And quickly. However, I think it's more a case of losses due to spending on DP players and better facilities across the league. I hope that people now realize how dumb of an idea it is to have DP's vs. a higher salary cap. I thought the idea of the salary cap was to prevent the league from folding like the old NASL, but with DP's you see clubs spending waaaay too much money on individual players. We outspent the entire league, but still couldn't make the play-offs. Imagine if we spent the Defoe money on 10 better foreigners instead. We would have made the play-offs then. I'm sick and tired of rules, regulations, management destroying the game of football that way.

This is a mess. Fix it now. Get rid of the DP rule and lay down the law: you can't spend beyond your means. If you can't keep up financially then you get moved. Simple as that.

I worry about this league.

[jloome]

Hmm, I'm not sure how to respond to the league losing $100 million last year - except to say that if that's indeed the case, then maybe it's time to replace management. And quickly. However, I think it's more a case of losses due to spending on DP players and better facilities across the league. I hope that people now realize how dumb of an idea it is to have DP's vs. a higher salary cap. I thought the idea of the salary cap was to prevent the league from folding like the old NASL, but with DP's you see clubs spending waaaay too much money on individual players. We outspent the entire league, but still couldn't make the play-offs. Imagine if we spent the Defoe money on 10 better foreigners instead. We would have made the play-offs then. I'm sick and tired of rules, regulations, management destroying the game of football that way.

This is a mess. Fix it now. Get rid of the DP rule and lay down the law: you can't spend beyond your means. If you can't keep up financially then you get moved. Simple as that.

I worry about this league.

The U.S. franchises are all owned by larger companies that use them as write-down machines, so their losses can reflect all sorts of costs and expenses actually created by unrelated activity. In other words, they're not really losing that much money. Some of them are definitely losing money, though. The new TV deal is rumored to be massive, however, so that'll cut down the annual red ink for the big spenders, even if one wonders what the hell the networks are thinking. They'll do anything for fresh content these days, it seems.

[Super]

The U.S. franchises are all owned by larger companies that use them as write-down machines, so their losses can reflect all sorts of costs and expenses actually created by unrelated activity. In other words, they're not really losing that much money. Some of them are definitely losing money, though. The new TV deal is rumored to be massive, however, so that'll cut down the annual red ink for the big spenders, even if one wonders what the hell the networks are thinking. They'll do anything for fresh content these days, it seems.

I guess we can really only speculate. TFC lost a ton of cash last year due to the new contracts with 3 DP's and investing into the stadium, but overall it's obviously been a very healthy business. Also, I'm sure the league wants to play up the "losing money" reality of the league with the pending CBA talks. Either way it's really time to change. The MLS is just too strange for its own good - especially if we want to start to compare ourselves to the rest of the world. We're greatly outspending leagues like the Scandinavian ones, and yet they have better quality football on display. Goes to show how the game can be killed with too much manipulation on the top level.

[Defoe]

Hmm, I'm not sure how to respond to the league losing $100 million last year - except to say that if that's indeed the case, then maybe it's time to replace management. And quickly. However, I think it's more a case of losses due to spending on DP players and better facilities across the league. I hope that people now realize how dumb of an idea it is to have DP's vs. a higher salary cap. I thought the idea of the salary cap was to prevent the league from folding like the old NASL, but with DP's you see clubs spending waaaay too much money on individual players. We outspent the entire league, but still couldn't make the play-offs. Imagine if we spent the Defoe money on 10 better foreigners instead. We would have made the play-offs then. I'm sick and tired of rules, regulations, management destroying the game of football that way.

This is a mess. Fix it now. Get rid of the DP rule and lay down the law: you can't spend beyond your means. If you can't keep up financially then you get moved. Simple as that.

I worry about this league.

I don't like the fact that Toronto FC is controlled on how they can spend their money. I understand the league wants parity but this is PREVENTING us from being on par. So frustrating and such a backwards approach. There were rumours we would sign Essien... why? The rules allows us to sign 3 DP'S so lets blow all our money on an over aged DP because that's the 'rule' :facepalm: They could sign 5 good young talents from south America for that type of coin. It's pretty ridiculous rules restraint us from being better. Imagine we used the 100 million on Bradley and Defoe on south american talent? omg. The goal should be to bring up the overall quantity level of talent in the league not bring in over age stars, you don't grow this way

[C.Ronaldo]

When Don Garber quotes "losses," you have to remember that those figures exclude TV Revenue (which the MLS owner/operators have in a separate company called Soccer United Marketing) and include artificially inflated stadium depreciation costs (used under U.S. tax law to justify tax write-offs). MLS Investors are smart people. They don't compete with one another for the chance to spend $80-100 million dollars in franchise fees plus many millions more in stadium costs just to lose $5 million per year (1/20th of $100 million). The figures are completely bogus, and they should be embarrassed to trot out such stuff!

The players see what teams are spending and they are not stupid enough to believe that the investors in MLS are just doing it out of a sense of largess for the US and Canadian soccer communities.



You see, he is including capital costs here. Remember that when you spend on capital costs, you are obtaining an asset (i.e. a stadium that you can use for more than MLS matches) in return.

you sure hes including capital costs and not just the depreciation expense on them? If he is , that is some serious Enrol like number fudging.

[ensco]

I think the thing that is different this time is that in 2010 was the threat of league failure (especially contraction). It had happened in the not so distant past (Florida in 2002). When the owners said to the players, "strike if you want, but we don't know if/when the fans will come back, and if they don't we'll shrink down some teams, it's your own funeral", that was credible.

But the investment in so many new stadiums, Dempsey/Bradley/Kaka/Lampard/Keane (and a lot of other guys too, don't forget, there were maybe 7 DPs league wide in 2009, and most were relatively inexpensive), the mega success of Seattle and Portland, all the interest in new teams (in the face of Chivas folding), rising franchise prices, the TV contract, the widening disparity in the union.

90% of the players weren't around in 2010, they weren't part of the tenuous beginnings of this league, all they see is a successful league and 17 year olds leaving academies to avoid becoming MLS chumps ..... I think 90% of these players feel cheated, aren't worried about losing jobs because of contraction, won't buy that line this time.

I wouldn't, anyway.






https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iu-7DXBiVsA

[Super]

I don't like the fact that Toronto FC is controlled on how they can spend their money. I understand the league wants parity but this is PREVENTING us from being on par. So frustrating and such a backwards approach. There were rumours we would sign Essien... why? The rules allows us to sign 3 DP'S so lets blow all our money on an over aged DP because that's the 'rule' :facepalm: They could sign 5 good young talents from south America for that type of coin. It's pretty ridiculous rules restraint us from being better. Imagine we used the 100 million on Bradley and Defoe on south american talent? omg. The goal should be to bring up the overall quantity level of talent in the league not bring in over age stars, you don't grow this way

I'm with you on this. When we compare ourselves to Denmark, Holland, Belgium, we spend far more than most of their teams, and yet the overall quality of TFC falls short. We have millionaires passing to $40k guys. When we are missing players on the team we can't fix it by signing someone because we always have to work within a very restrictive salary cap. Look at Nelsen's first year. We basically were stuck with bad contracts and had to flush a whole season - just because of the salary cap. That's madness. Definitely not how you grow a sport.

Enough already with spending 90% on 3 guys and 10% on the other 22 guys. It's cartoonish and makes us the laughing stock of the league. No one respects us. Look at the English press. It's well known we're just a retirement league over there. Not exactly the reputation we should want. Instead, sign 10 great foreigners instead of 1 has-been foreigner. Surely that would improve the game and increase our respect around the world?

[Initial B]

Sorry Super, MLS teams only have 8 foreign player slots per team.

Perhaps they will bargain away a DP slot to raise the cap by an extra $1.2 Million above the $4 million we've been hearing about? There are only 11 DPs in the league that make more than that amount anyways. Imagine what sort of players we could get with a $5.2 Million dollar cap but only 2 DPs...

[Super]

Sorry Super, MLS teams only have 8 foreign player slots per team.

Perhaps they will bargain away a DP slot to raise the cap by an extra $1.2 Million above the $4 million we've been hearing about? There are only 11 DPs in the league that make more than that amount anyways. Imagine what sort of players we could get with a $5.2 Million dollar cap but only 2 DPs...

Those 8 foreigners would be much better if we had the funds to invest in higher salaries, so of course that's the most important step forward. The league will find a way to still manage all teams and that's sad (for me) but unfortunately the way things work in North America. I'm not a fan of it, but it is what it is. I'd much rather adopt a "spend within your means" system. There are lots of cities wanting to join the MLS, so I say let's kick out the teams with no funds or support and replace them with teams in better markets. The league is being held back to keep small clubs alive. Not sure we need to do that when we have so many teams waiting to join. At the end of the day we as fans should care about the on-field quality, and right now we're not seeing a lot of that unfortunately. Sure, there are great individual performances, but there's still way too many foreigners in this league who should be swapped with better (and more expensive) guys who can help improve the quality of play.

[Initial B]

Just for comparison's sake, take a look at the salaries of the top 200 players in MLS right now:

http://www.spotrac.com/rankings/mls/limit-200/

I look at all the high-quality defenders who are paid less than Steven Caldwell and I have to shake my head. Either TFC is vastly overpaying for talent or the majority of MLS talent is vastly underpaid. It just reinforces to me that we have to turn away from our European fixation and focus on Carribean, South and Central American talent. And here I thought Bez was a capologist...

[Yohan]

Just for comparison's sake, take a look at the salaries of the top 200 players in MLS right now:

http://www.spotrac.com/rankings/mls/limit-200/

I look at all the high-quality defenders who are paid less than Steven Caldwell and I have to shake my head. Either TFC is vastly overpaying for talent or the majority of MLS talent is vastly underpaid. It just reinforces to me that we have to turn away from our European fixation and focus on Carribean, South and Central American talent. And here I thought Bez was a capologist...
Remember that first year Caldwell was playing for Toronto, he was playing for like 90k. I think his contract was structured that he was on for cheap first year, then at his current rate for year 2 and 3. So on average, Caldwell's contract would be on par with MLS defenders of similar calibre.

[ensco]

The issue of TFC's barbell strategy under the cap is only relevant insofar as it reinforces ownership's resolve to NOT increaase the cap, because what TFC did needs to be stopped because it causes wage inflation and doesn't work.

[Beach_Red]

Those 8 foreigners would be much better if we had the funds to invest in higher salaries, so of course that's the most important step forward. The league will find a way to still manage all teams and that's sad (for me) but unfortunately the way things work in North America. I'm not a fan of it, but it is what it is. I'd much rather adopt a "spend within your means" system. There are lots of cities wanting to join the MLS, so I say let's kick out the teams with no funds or support and replace them with teams in better markets. The league is being held back to keep small clubs alive. Not sure we need to do that when we have so many teams waiting to join. At the end of the day we as fans should care about the on-field quality, and right now we're not seeing a lot of that unfortunately. Sure, there are great individual performances, but there's still way too many foreigners in this league who should be swapped with better (and more expensive) guys who can help improve the quality of play.

Lots of cities, sure, but are there really lots of ownership groups willing to put up the money for stadiums and willing to get into bidding wars for players?

The idea of MLS restricting foreign players was to develop American players - of course the quality would lag. But I think you're right, that isn't going to work. Unfortunately, I also don't think a soccer league full of foreign players can compete with the other sports in America and will either go the way of the old NASL or be very small-time.

A lot will likely hinge on the new team in NY and Miami. If they fail they will probably take a lot of the league down with them.

[Super]

Lots of cities, sure, but are there really lots of ownership groups willing to put up the money for stadiums and willing to get into bidding wars for players?

The idea of MLS restricting foreign players was to develop American players - of course the quality would lag. But I think you're right, that isn't going to work. Unfortunately, I also don't think a soccer league full of foreign players can compete with the other sports in America and will either go the way of the old NASL or be very small-time.

A lot will likely hinge on the new team in NY and Miami. If they fail they will probably take a lot of the league down with them.

I think we all want the MLS to one day be a top 5 league in the world - or at least Don Garber made a statement to that effect. Or did he say top 10? Regardless, we won't be a top 20 league until we get rid of the salary cap. Or raise it to $10 mil or so. Simple as that. You can't compete on the world stage with salary caps - unless it's so big (like the NHL, NFL, NBA) that it's greater than all of their competitors anyway. Problem is that the salary cap has a very unfortunate effect on the makeup of a team. MLS teams look odd on the surface, and that's because of the money juggling. Penny pinching on 23 players and then blow the bank on 1 who gets paid more than all of the rest. That's a result of the salary cap and DP rule. So they have to eventually look at that. They can raise the salary cap to 5 mil or whatever, but we still won't have top 10 league football on display.

As far as your point on foreign players, I definitely think we'll be able to compete with BETTER players, period. Doesn't matter where they are from. Most Americans figure soccer is foreign anyway ;) Look at NHL. It's a Canadian sport, so of course it's populated mainly by Canadian players.

[Beach_Red]

I think we all want the MLS to one day be a top 5 league in the world - or at least Don Garber made a statement to that effect. Or did he say top 10? Regardless, we won't be a top 20 league until we get rid of the salary cap. Or raise it to $10 mil or so. Simple as that. You can't compete on the world stage with salary caps - unless it's so big (like the NHL, NFL, NBA) that it's greater than all of their competitors anyway. Problem is that the salary cap has a very unfortunate effect on the makeup of a team. MLS teams look odd on the surface, and that's because of the money juggling. Penny pinching on 23 players and then blow the bank on 1 who gets paid more than all of the rest. That's a result of the salary cap and DP rule. So they have to eventually look at that. They can raise the salary cap to 5 mil or whatever, but we still won't have top 10 league football on display.

As far as your point on foreign players, I definitely think we'll be able to compete with BETTER players, period. Doesn't matter where they are from. Most Americans figure soccer is foreign anyway ;) Look at NHL. It's a Canadian sport, so of course it's populated mainly by Canadian players.

I think it does matter to Americans. But yes, I would like to see the salary cap and single-entity eliminated. Let the teams find their own level. I don't think it would be one of the top 20 leagues in the world, it would be on about the level of AA baseball here, but that would be fine, tickets would be cheap ;).

[ryan]

I think we all want the MLS to one day be a top 5 league in the world - or at least Don Garber made a statement to that effect. Or did he say top 10? Regardless, we won't be a top 20 league until we get rid of the salary cap. Or raise it to $10 mil or so. Simple as that. You can't compete on the world stage with salary caps - unless it's so big (like the NHL, NFL, NBA) that it's greater than all of their competitors anyway. Problem is that the salary cap has a very unfortunate effect on the makeup of a team. MLS teams look odd on the surface, and that's because of the money juggling. Penny pinching on 23 players and then blow the bank on 1 who gets paid more than all of the rest. That's a result of the salary cap and DP rule. So they have to eventually look at that. They can raise the salary cap to 5 mil or whatever, but we still won't have top 10 league football on display.

As far as your point on foreign players, I definitely think we'll be able to compete with BETTER players, period. Doesn't matter where they are from. Most Americans figure soccer is foreign anyway ;) Look at NHL. It's a Canadian sport, so of course it's populated mainly by Canadian players.

Aye but steps have to be taken to get there. Until this league generates serious TV monies, this can't/won't happen. There has been a lot of investment into MLS, not to sure these investors have gotten their returns just yet.

Then again, to help open up the TV market, they need players we want to watch. Bit of a catch 22.

[ag futbol]

I think we all want the MLS to one day be a top 5 league in the world - or at least Don Garber made a statement to that effect. Or did he say top 10? Regardless, we won't be a top 20 league until we get rid of the salary cap. Or raise it to $10 mil or so. Simple as that. You can't compete on the world stage with salary caps - unless it's so big (like the NHL, NFL, NBA) that it's greater than all of their competitors anyway. Problem is that the salary cap has a very unfortunate effect on the makeup of a team. MLS teams look odd on the surface, and that's because of the money juggling. Penny pinching on 23 players and then blow the bank on 1 who gets paid more than all of the rest. That's a result of the salary cap and DP rule. So they have to eventually look at that. They can raise the salary cap to 5 mil or whatever, but we still won't have top 10 league football on display.

As far as your point on foreign players, I definitely think we'll be able to compete with BETTER players, period. Doesn't matter where they are from. Most Americans figure soccer is foreign anyway ;) Look at NHL. It's a Canadian sport, so of course it's populated mainly by Canadian players.
I don't think getting rid of the cap completely is necessary. I do think changing the structure to allow for better quality across the board is required. Bundesliga has a cap, it's based on revenues earned in the prior year. Doesn't get much attention and isn't all that restrictive.

A more accurate statement would be: as long as MLS clings to single entity and it's private rules (which nobody understands) it will never be a top league.

This CBA will tell us a lot about what the ambition level is of ownership. Talking a big game like Garber does is easy, yet to see any concrete evidence they have the business plan to back up their talk.

[Detroit_TFC]

^ I'd restate that as the owners' need for investment protection (single entity) may at some point be overcome by the desire for increased revenue growth (bigger name players, bigger stadiums, more latitude to compete with other teams, all resulting in bigger tv deals, etc.).

[Waggy]

There's a huge difference between revenue and profit. I'd easily believe the MLS as an entity lost $100 million as cash flow (players, new stadiums etc), but they gained far more then that in assets (future TV deals, stadiums, players, merch sales, future ticket sales etc). MLS financially is in one of the best positions of any soccer league in the world thanks to the salary cap. But the model is based on being a 3rd tier league, and now the league is knocking on the door of the top tier. Nothing wrong with keeping the cap but players should ALL be paid a more than livable wage (that means WAY more than a 50k minimum salary, minimum should prob be around 200k), and 5-6 DP's outside of that structure. Can every team afford it? No. But how many teams could afford 3 DP's when they put that rule in. The rules should lead growth not follow it.

[buddies]

Not saying they need to make a huge jump in one contract but if they want to compete with the top leagues in the world within the next 10 years and this contract is 3 or 4 years long, enough with the lipstick on a pig incremental increases. Either state your intent honestly and say we want to compete with the top leagues in the world and don't just talk the talk, walk the walk too!!

http://www.theguardian.com/football/2014/may/01/premier-league-accounts-club-by-club-david-conn

If you are just pulling the chain of the fans lets put things in perspective. If we were to go out and buy the entire Peterborough United squad from the English Championship ...

http://www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2014/may/22/championship-club-accounts-profit-loss-and-the-wage-bill

it would cost us 6.2 Million Pounds ... about $10M ... and how impressed would the TFC fan base be with that? They wouldn't. As a group they'd be pissed if that was the level we were shooting for but that's the going rate. If the salary cap is any less than $10M (which IMO it will be) the league has to cut the crap and stop misleading it's fan base.

http://sport.stv.tv/football/clubs/hearts/204137-comparing-the-wage-bills-in-the-scottish-premier-league-for-season-201011/

More than likely next year's salary cap is going to fall somewhere comparable to a Scottish Premiership Team. Once we see the new number I wonder which underwhelming team we could afford ... more than likely something comparable to Inverness Caley Thistle or my own personal favourite ... St Mirren.

[ensco]

^Great find on that Guardian story laying out wages in the Championship. I mean, they have the opposite problem, they pay too much, but, I mean, wow....

Makes you feel like a chump for watching MLS at all.

I see Getafe play Valencia at 3pm tomorrow....

[Initial B]

The real question is - could a Championship team defeat an MLS team at least 50% of the time? If not, then Championship players are overpaid. We need to stop looking east at Europe for players and start looking south.

[Waggy]

The real question is - could a Championship team defeat an MLS team at least 50% of the time? If not, then Championship players are overpaid. We need to stop looking east at Europe for players and start looking south.

In pro sports salaries are a reflection of overall league revenues, not an individuals skill level. If the Championship brings in the kind of revenue that they can pay players that much then that's what they should be paid. Just every manager should be fired for making terrible decisions.

[Yohan]

http://www.si.com/planet-futbol/2014/12/04/mls-players-union-cba-negotiations-don-garber-free-agency

long, but must read

[Ajax TFC]

Honestly, just let the players have free agency. So long as the cap is there, it won't make a whole lot of difference. If a player's team only wants to give them the minimum offer in order to keep their MLS rights, and another team is willing to pay them say 200k, then why not let them move to the team that's willing to use the cap space on them? In the end all the teams still have to be cap compliant

[KGH]

I'm OK with the idea of letting them have FA after 2 contracts. It's pretty close to how the NHL has their RFA & FA.

I was doing some thinking and I think a salary cap of $4.7M with a minimum salary of $75k would be a good next step. To come to the $4.7M I broke a team down as follows:

1) 4 DPs @ $400k = $1,600,000
3) 2 @ $300k = $600,000
4) 6 @ $250k = $1,500,000
5) 5 @ $125k = $625,000
6) 5 @ $75k = $375,000
7) 8 non cap players (GA's, HG) minimum compensation of $75k but $15k each year of contract must be put into education fund to cover future education costs should they flame out. Logic here is a HG player is likely giving up a scholarship to pursue the dream.

Lastly, 4 DPs:
1) Young DP - Under 24
2) Domestic DP (Must be a national team member in US or CAN)
3) 2 other DPs

[Pookie]

Honestly, just let the players have free agency. So long as the cap is there, it won't make a whole lot of difference. If a player's team only wants to give them the minimum offer in order to keep their MLS rights, and another team is willing to pay them say 200k, then why not let them move to the team that's willing to use the cap space on them? In the end all the teams still have to be cap compliant

Here's where my head hurts.

How do you have free agency, ie teams competing for the services of a player and bidding up salaries in a "free market" when the legal contract and salary is the responsibility of the league?

Player x could move from Columbus to LA. Their contract and salary are still signed with and paid by MLS.

Is the league really going to be bidding against itself?

[ag futbol]

Here's where my head hurts.

How do you have free agency, ie teams competing for the services of a player and bidding up salaries in a "free market" when the legal contract and salary is the responsibility of the league?

Player x could move from Columbus to LA. Their contract and salary are still signed with and paid by MLS.

Is the league really going to be bidding against itself?
It already does. They would argue it's like two divisions of the same company wanting the same employee, but really it's about preserving single entity and restricting bargaining rights.

[Pookie]

It already does. They would argue it's like two divisions of the same company wanting the same employee, but really it's about preserving single entity and restricting bargaining rights.

How does it bid against itself now?

[ag futbol]

How does it bid against itself now?
You see it with incoming DP players, they try to force everyone to bid internally and only have one club competing but it spills over.

Watch with Torres this winter. Bet you it won't look like a single entity.

[Pookie]

You see it with incoming DP players, they try to force everyone to bid internally and only have one club competing but it spills over.

Watch with Torres this winter. Bet you it won't look like a single entity.

But teams can make discovery claims on players and DPs prior to coming to the league for the express purpose of avoiding bidding wars.

Further, the bulk of players aren't DPs so what we are talking about is whether a guy like Lovitiz would be able to get a raise from another team if he reached a certain age. The fact that the cheque comes from MLS means it is highly unlikely.

[ag futbol]

But teams can make discovery claims on players and DPs prior to coming to the league for the express purpose of avoiding bidding wars.

Further, the bulk of players aren't DPs so what we are talking about is whether a guy like Lovitiz would be able to get a raise from another team if he reached a certain age. The fact that the cheque comes from MLS means it is highly unlikely.
Technicalities and subterfuge.

Bradley came to MLS, teams lined up bids; they publicly bitched about how much money TFC offered after the fact. Same has happened with others. When push comes to shove their separate nature bubbles to the surface.

Teams are privately bidding for players rights via trades. Player agents also discuss with the clubs privately the likelyhood they would sign and for how much. Nobody is going to trade SKC for Collin's rights unless they have an indication they can sign him and how much that costs. That is, in another round about way, clubs competing.

[Pookie]

Technicalities and subterfuge.

Bradley came to MLS, teams lined up bids; they publicly bitched about how much money TFC offered after the fact. Same has happened with others. When push comes to shove their separate nature bubbles to the surface.

Teams are privately bidding for players rights via trades. Player agents also discuss with the clubs privately the likelyhood they would sign and for how much. Nobody is going to trade SKC for Collin's rights unless they have an indication they can sign him and how much that costs. That is, in another round about way, clubs competing.

Mostly you are taking about DPs that are already "free agents" so to speak in that they are not under contract to MLS.

There are over 300 players, including Collin that are signed with MLS. When he moves, so do his terms. There is no bidding for his service, other than a trade offer. His cheque still comes from MLS regardless of the contract or colour of his kit.

[Beach_Red]

Mostly you are taking about DPs that are already "free agents" so to speak in that they are not under contract to MLS.

There are over 300 players, including Collin that are signed with MLS. When he moves, so do his terms. There is no bidding for his service, other than a trade offer. His cheque still comes from MLS regardless of the contract or colour of his kit.

Sure, but it's not really so cut and dried. MLS is still a work in progress, still trying to find the right formula. All these rules are subject to change at any time.

[ag futbol]

Mostly you are taking about DPs that are already "free agents" so to speak in that they are not under contract to MLS.

There are over 300 players, including Collin that are signed with MLS. When he moves, so do his terms. There is no bidding for his service, other than a trade offer. His cheque still comes from MLS regardless of the contract or colour of his kit.
Again, the cheque is a technicality. If every NHL or NBA player received their cheque from the NBA does that say anything about what different teams do to acquire the player and what they are willing to pay? It does not.

I'll stand by my original statement, there is bidding. It is not done in public, but it exists. What MLS has done, but having bird rights on out of contract players is increased the cost of other clubs to acquire the same player in the market. So if TFC want to go out and acquire Collin, they have to pay whatever his salary demands are and they have to pay SKC for the right to sign him. This keeps at least a portion of the money in house, but the issue is his bird right fee doesn't exist if that player wants to sign in any other league, so you see players leave who would otherwise stay because of the increased cost of keeping someone in the league.

Do you actually think a MLS GM would trade for someone's rights and otherwise not give any consideration to what that player wants to sign after the fact? It is not plainly obvious that both the player agents and the GMs have a lot of incentives to work the back-channels as a means of price discovery? Come on, this is business 101 here.

[Pookie]

So if TFC want to go out and acquire Collin, they have to pay whatever his salary demands are and they have to pay SKC for the right to sign him.

But they don't. Right now, TFC would pay nothing for Collin.

50% of revenue goes into a league pool. The league pool is used to pay salaries, like Collin's. Collins contract is assigned as a budget charge to whichever team holds his rights.

If the budget charge exceeds the budget assigned... by MLS... to the team they simply float some allocation money their way for "reasons deemed acceptable by the competition committee" if desired.

Think of it as a fantasy pool of sorts with some kind of value assigned to the team. If Collin or his agents desire a raise, they don't lobby a team. They lobby the league. Now, they might ask a team to speak to the league but Sales/Business 101 tells you that the person that signs the cheque is the Economic Buyer. The power to accept or deny contracts rests solely with the league. (See Melberg as an example).


Do you actually think a MLS GM would trade for someone's rights and otherwise not give any consideration to what that player wants to sign after the fact?

What the player wants is irrelevant. The player is under contract to MLS not the team. If they have an existing contract those are the terms. They either report to the team they are assigned to or they don't get paid by the league. If they are on an expiring contract it doesn't matter as long as the team makes a "bonafide offer" they retain their rights. If not, the player goes to the draft process. They can't get out from under the league.

Free agency can only come via the end of single entity which would likely also mean the end of revenue sharing. Teams would actually pay wages for players. Contracts would be held with teams not the league. Only then could bidding benefit the players.

The current system has successfully kept costs down by design. It would continue to keep costs down if free agency were introduced and single entity still reigned. But it can't. In fact, the legal case for free agency requires proof that single entity isn't necessary and isn't in play. MLS will do all it can to protect its current structure and avoid free agency.

[ag futbol]

But they don't. Right now, TFC would pay nothing for Collin.

50% of revenue goes into a league pool. The league pool is used to pay salaries, like Collin's. Collins contract is assigned as a budget charge to whichever team holds his rights.

If the budget charge exceeds the budget assigned... by MLS... to the team they simply float some allocation money their way for "reasons deemed acceptable by the competition committee" if desired.

Think of it as a fantasy pool of sorts with some kind of value assigned to the team. If Collin or his agents desire a raise, they don't lobby a team. They lobby the league. Now, they might ask a team to speak to the league but Sales/Business 101 tells you that the person that signs the cheque is the Economic Buyer. The power to accept or deny contracts rests solely with the league. (See Melberg as an example).
To use a Kevin Payne phase when it comes to allocation money and other league stuff: is is all fungible. Whether these teams are trading gold, trinkets, or baseball cards they have value behind them. Collin's ability to lobby the league for a raise depends on the team's perception of value, not head office. Head office is not going to offer Colin a $100K raise if the club isn't onside with it.

Again, your being snowed by layers in the process. You're looking at the league going to the player and negotiating the contract and the name on the cheque. That's not what drives the process. The process is driven by clubs who need players to win and players who want to get paid the most money possible. The central bureaucracy of the league is meant to slow that down and it does, but it doesn't completely eliminate the ability to bargain.





What the player wants is irrelevant. The player is under contract to MLS not the team. If they have an existing contract those are the terms. They either report to the team they are assigned to or they don't get paid by the league. If they are on an expiring contract it doesn't matter as long as the team makes a "bonafide offer" they retain their rights. If not, the player goes to the draft process. They can't get out from under the league.

Free agency can only come via the end of single entity which would likely also mean the end of revenue sharing. Teams would actually pay wages for players. Contracts would be held with teams not the league. Only then could bidding benefit the players.

The current system has successfully kept costs down by design. It would continue to keep costs down if free agency were introduced and single entity still reigned. But it can't. In fact, the legal case for free agency requires proof that single entity isn't necessary and isn't in play. MLS will do all it can to protect its current structure and avoid free agency.
Disagree. Guys have renegotiated terms under existing contracts, Henry and Osorio being two of those on TFC.

I am not arguing that the players explicitly have all the rights they would under free agency. What I'm saying is competition for players already exists, it's just hidden behind walls because MLS badly wants to control costs. In the end, it's self-regulation where the participants have an incentive to cheat. There are about a billion examples of how well that works, see NCAA athletics for one example.

[ensco]

I wonder if the players will are willing to "die on the hill" of getting "the single entity" system undone here.

With all the new deep-pocket owners, the TV contract ... feels like now or never to me. But they'd have to be willing to sit for a year to get it, I think.

[Pookie]

To use a Kevin Payne phase when it comes to allocation money and other league stuff: is is all fungible. Whether these teams are trading gold, trinkets, or baseball cards they have value behind them. Collin's ability to lobby the league for a raise depends on the team's perception of value, not head office. Head office is not going to offer Colin a $100K raise if the club isn't onside with it.

agfutbol, I love reading your opinion on many things.

Don't get caught up in the optics though. The CBA very clearly spells out that the union waived its right to bargain over elements of player movement.



Disagree. Guys have renegotiated terms under existing contracts, Henry and Osorio being two of those on TFC.

Have they? Because dating back to 2006, the CBA has guaranteed a minimum raise of 5% per year for players like Henry. For example:

Section 18.13 Annual Base Salary Increase: Each SPA covering more than one (1) Season
(including years in which MLS has an option to extend the SPA), and which provides the Player
with a Base Salary of less than $60,000, shall provide for annual increases in base salary of not
less than five percent (5%) per annum.


Maybe Henry was simply exercising his rights under the CBA. Again though, all approvals and negotiation would ultimately end with the league.


I am not arguing that the players explicitly have all the rights they would under free agency. What I'm saying is competition for players already exists, it's just hidden behind walls because MLS badly wants to control costs. In the end, it's self-regulation where the participants have an incentive to cheat. There are about a billion examples of how well that works, see NCAA athletics for one example.

I don't see how competition for players exist when the league has mandated the legal right to move players wherever they see fit.

Dating back to 2006, the CBA is very clear that the player's legal rights reside with the league:

Section 8.2 Except as otherwise limited hereunder, a Player shall perform his duties and
responsibilities at such place or places and at such times as may be designated by MLS. A
Player’s services may be assigned to the central MLS player pool or to any Team (or Reserve
Team or Development Squad) in the League….MLS will notify the Player as to the Team to which he shall initially be assigned




I would agree that teams compete for discovery signings. And increasingly exhibit competitive behaviours in terms of trades and drafting. As it stands now though, free agency within a single entity system with clauses like the above, would mean little to nothing for players. All the power, the legal definitive power, would reside with the league.

[Ajax TFC]

I think right now players who are out of contract are essentially RFAs. Lets say a player is making 100k on their old contract, but pulled a Wondo and suddenly feels that they are worth 300k, but their team doesn't want to use that much of their cap on them. Since MLS is far from the only league in the world, said player can simply leave go find a team in another league to play for if their MLS team doesn't pay them what they're worth. So the MLS team has three options. Either pay them what they want; offer them a 5% increase in salary in order to maintain their MLS rights; or trade their rights to a different MLS team that will offer them what they want. The team will trade the player's rights away because it's useless to them to own the rights to a player who's not going to play for you for what you're willing to offer them.

I don't think UFA would really do a whole lot to inflate salaries since with the cap so low, no team is going to offer anyone much more than their worth anyway. And the way I see it, it's the cap that ensures financial stability, not restricted free agency. The league isn't going to care whether player A makes 100k and player B makes 300k or they both make 200k. All they'll really care about is that they're paying 400k to those two players on that team.

[Areathrasher]

agfutbol, I love reading your opinion on many things.

Don't get caught up in the optics though. The CBA very clearly spells out that the union waived its right to bargain over elements of player movement.



Have they? Because dating back to 2006, the CBA has guaranteed a minimum raise of 5% per year for players like Henry. For example:

Section 18.13 Annual Base Salary Increase: Each SPA covering more than one (1) Season
(including years in which MLS has an option to extend the SPA), and which provides the Player
with a Base Salary of less than $60,000, shall provide for annual increases in base salary of not
less than five percent (5%) per annum.
.

Osorios salary jumped from the 40k to 140k range.

[Pookie]

I think right now players who are out of contract are essentially RFAs. Lets say a player is making 100k on their old contract, but pulled a Wondo and suddenly feels that they are worth 300k, but their team doesn't want to use that much of their cap on them. Since MLS is far from the only league in the world, said player can simply leave go find a team in another league to play for if their MLS team doesn't pay them what they're worth. So the MLS team has three options. Either pay them what they want; offer them a 5% increase in salary in order to maintain their MLS rights; or trade their rights to a different MLS team that will offer them what they want. The team will trade the player's rights away because it's useless to them to own the rights to a player who's not going to play for you for what you're willing to offer them.

I don't think UFA would really do a whole lot to inflate salaries since with the cap so low, no team is going to offer anyone much more than their worth anyway. And the way I see it, it's the cap that ensures financial stability, not restricted free agency. The league isn't going to care whether player A makes 100k and player B makes 300k or they both make 200k. All they'll really care about is that they're paying 400k to those two players on that team.


It's complicated but you aren't far off the mark. Except let me fix it up to describe what actually happens and the subtle difference is what we are all stuck on.



Lets say a player is making 100k on their old contract, but pulled a Wondo and suddenly feels that they are worth 300k, but their team doesn't want to use that much of their cap on them.


Possible. But MLS flexes the "cap" for teams all the time with allocation money. They did it for Dero, as a non-DP and for O'Dea and others. DeRo is actually a good example to illustrate your point. Let's revisit that.


Since MLS is far from the only league in the world, said player can simply leave go find a team in another league to play for if their MLS team doesn't pay them what they're worth.

MLS teams don't pay. MLS does. When DeRo was in a debate with TFC over his contract, MLS actually came out and said he was on the right type of contract for a player of his skill. It wasn't up to TFC what they would pay DeRo. It was up to MLS. When he was traded to NY, his contract went with him.

Was their conversation behind the scenes about finding a number that makes him happy? Probably. Would a team be involved in that? Probably. Would MLS ultimately have the call to make? Absolutely.

Another example is Melberg. TFC and the agent agreed to a number that they brought to the league. MLS felt that the deal wasn't in the league's interest so they nixed it. Ultimate decision rests with the league.


So the MLS team has three options. Either pay them what they want; offer them a 5% increase in salary in order to maintain their MLS rights; or trade their rights to a different MLS team that will offer them what they want. The team will trade the player's rights away because it's useless to them to own the rights to a player who's not going to play for you for what you're willing to offer them.

The 3rd option is the sticking point. Teams don't pay salaries, MLS's revenue shared pool of funds does.

If MLS sets a limit on the number of contracts they will have, they ultimately decide if they can pay a player more out of this central pool. If MLS has $60M for salaries, that's all they have. If players are routinely asking for more and holding out, it will drive costs beyond what MLS can pay. Not the teams. Teams don't pay salaries.

That's why replacing DPs who are injured is so problematic. TFC could afford to go out and get one (beyond the max that the league pays). But it doesn't work that way. MLS pays the amount up to the max. Teams cover the difference. MLS can't be paying $350k for replacement players league wide. It would blow their budget. It simply can't afford to replace DPs.

It isn't a world of absolutes and as pointed out by a few year, it is a moving target. But we can't oversimply a very complicated structure that is different than most sports leagues we are familiar with. Free agency may be the goal for players but it will mean relatively little unless single entity goes away. Legal and financial power rests with the league.

[Richard]

Bush league non sense, top 20 league my ass.

[ag futbol]

Pookie, certainly respect your opinion as well. Little debate around here is always healthy :D

[ensco]

Lampard being held by Man City through May is possibly interesting data about ownerships' view of the likelihood of a lockout/strike.

[Richard]

Not really, its more like Lampard unexpectedly became useful for Man City.

Got to love Man City though, have your farm club pay the wages to get around financial fair play rules.

[Areathrasher]

Not really, its more like Lampard unexpectedly became useful for Man City.

Got to love Man City though, have your farm club pay the wages to get around financial fair play rules.

He doesnt have an NYCFC contract and has been a city player the whole time.

However it is has emerged that Lampard has never been on loan at City from NYC but instead signed a deal that extended beyond New Year’s Eve. The champions had to have the existing terms amended to have a break clause removed and were granted permission to do so by the Premier League on Thursday.




As no player can be registered to two clubs at the same time Lampard is officially on City’s books. He may possibly have a signed a pre-contract agreement or agreed terms with City Football Group, the parent company of both clubs.

http://www.theguardian.com/football/2015/jan/01/frank-lampard-manchester-city-next-season-manuel-pellegrini-mls-new-york-city?CMP=share_btn_tw

[Richard]

He doesnt have an NYCFC contract and has been a city player the whole time.

Makes this all the more hilarious. :facepalm:

http://s13.postimg.org/jrwhqie4n/Capture.jpg

[Detroit_TFC]

Bit of an update from Jeff Carlisle at ESPN FC:

http://www.espnfc.com/major-league-soccer/story/2232135/mls-confident-new-cba-will-be-done-in-time-for-march-6-season-start

[ag futbol]

Average Liga MX salary is double MLS. Pretty crazy, especially when you consider the skew in the MLS number with DP salaries.

[Detroit_TFC]

That is a potent stat. MLSPU need to press on that until it bleeds.

[barticusz]

That is a potent stat. MLSPU need to press on that until it bleeds.

Here's the thing though.. Increase an average number while the subtance remains the same doesn't make the league any better. Granted having higher salaries will attract more kids into wanting to play soccer in the future, it doesn't improve the current status of the league. Other than new players coming in of course. But that's why you just need to increase the salary cap space and not the minimum contract amount. If you want to get paid you need to earn it.

[Detroit_TFC]

True, have to move the whole pay structure up. In terms of framing the arguments though, the union would do well to focus on MLS's desire to better compete with Liga MX. All that hooey about being a top league in the world is irritating when the more important target is right in front of their faces.

[ag futbol]

Short run this holds (somewhat), but long run market will adjust. Kids still quit Socccer or bypass MLS because of the pay packet. We have slippage to Europe as well.

We'll also benefit from better internationals right away. So it's not just an inflationary wage scenario.

Plenty of stories of teams playing poorly when guys feel unsettled / can't focus on their career as well. We don't always get the most out of the players we have. Easy to forget that.

[barticusz]

Short run this holds (somewhat), but long run market will adjust. Kids still quit Socccer or bypass MLS because of the pay packet. We have slippage to Europe as well.

We'll also benefit from better internationals right away. So it's not just an inflationary wage scenario.

Plenty of stories of teams playing poorly when guys feel unsettled / can't focus on their career as well. We don't always get the most out of the players we have. Easy to forget that.

There's the other side of the coin too where players get paid insane amounts of many.. looking at you NHL.. and they don't show up for work at all.

[Red I]

True, have to move the whole pay structure up. In terms of framing the arguments though, the union would do well to focus on MLS's desire to better compete with Liga MX. All that hooey about being a top league in the world is irritating when the more important target is right in front of their faces.

If you were to valuate the talent though, you cannot put an MLS club against a Liga MX club and argue they should be equal pay if the quality is not on par - should be higher, i think we can all agree, but it would be hard to argue it as near equal value - honestly, the union should probably steer clear of that argument, and focus on the incentive to hone craft here, adding future-value with the development of players domestically, keeping known domestic stars here adds quality to the brand of MLS, etc.

The article is a little strange though - they give different fugures for the mean salary and the average salary - aren't they the same thing?? Unless someone confused mean for median in one of those values, i'm pretty sure mean is the average

[gdg_9]

If you were to valuate the talent though, you cannot put an MLS club against a Liga MX club and argue they should be equal pay if the quality is not on par - should be higher, i think we can all agree, but it would be hard to argue it as near equal value - honestly, the union should probably steer clear of that argument, and focus on the incentive to hone craft here, adding future-value with the development of players domestically, keeping known domestic stars here adds quality to the brand of MLS, etc.

The article is a little strange though - they give different fugures for the mean salary and the average salary - aren't they the same thing?? Unless someone confused mean for median in one of those values, i'm pretty sure mean is the average

The author, Jeff Carlisle, tweeted out afterwards that he meant Median, not mean... apparently the editors of the site just haven't fixed it yet.

[ag futbol]

There's the other side of the coin too where players get paid insane amounts of many.. looking at you NHL.. and they don't show up for work at all.
I think we're a ways away from that at this point :)

[barticusz]

I think we're a ways away from that at this point :)

... Really??? Looking at you Defoe. Ever since his injury at RSL he looked disinterested.

[Detroit_TFC]

In the short term, yes a substantial increase in the pay structure would reward current talent which is not at the same level on average as Liga MX but the assumption is that it would over time drive increased quality (better foreign players coming in, the better domestic players staying rather than going to Europe,etc).

[ag futbol]

... Really??? Looking at you Defoe. Ever since his injury at RSL he looked disinterested.
Well yeah, but that's a small percentage of MLS players.

Personally I'd have no problem capping DP salaries at a few million and giving more back to the regular roster guys, so we don't have to watch part timers scrap it out as soon as a few injuries happen.

[barticusz]

Dont' get me wrong I'm fine with increasing the floor so that the MLS can attract new good young talent and not miss out on them to European leagues. But there needs to be a subtantial increase in the cap so that the current players which really don't cut it will see what it takes to make the big money when the new players come in.

[Graeme]

... Really??? Looking at you Defoe. Ever since his injury at RSL he looked disinterested.

I thought that, ever since his injury, he looked injured...

[barticusz]

I thought that, ever since his injury, he looked injured...

He also stated that he was fully fit.
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/sports/soccer/jermain-defoe-back-training-with-toronto-fc-after-injury-layoff/article20761501/

And was basically absent on the pitch. Unacceptable.

[ag futbol]

Dont' get me wrong I'm fine with increasing the floor so that the MLS can attract new good young talent and not miss out on them to European leagues. But there needs to be a subtantial increase in the cap so that the current players which really don't cut it will see what it takes to make the big money when the new players come in.
Yeah I agree, makes things simpler. Sad fact is that on the low end MLS is not paying enough to have a full time committed and talented professional. Some guys intern elsewjere in the off season to prepare for life after football, when ideally you'd have a full rest / prep for the following season.

I'm not saying throw stupid money at anyone, just that they should have enough stability to focus on their career while they are footballers.

[barticusz]

Yeah I agree, makes things simpler. Sad fact is that on the low end MLS is not paying enough to have a full time committed and talented professional. Some guys intern elsewjere in the off season to prepare for life after football, when ideally you'd have a full rest / prep for the following season.

I'm not saying throw stupid money at anyone, just that they should have enough stability to focus on their career while they are footballers.

The thing is though.. the median salary is what 90k a year. That's nothing to sneeze at. That's above the household income average in Canada. These guys aren't living in a shack unable to buy food. They get paid a good salary, and on top of that they get great treatment and food from their club. Let's not pretend that it's a horrible life.

Even if some are just making 50k.. guess what.. that is what a lot of people in this Country and USA make.

[Red I]

The thing is though.. the median salary is what 90k a year. That's nothing to sneeze at. That's above the household income average in Canada. These guys aren't living in a shack unable to buy food. They get paid a good salary, and on top of that they get great treatment and food from their club. Let's not pretend that it's a horrible life.

Even if some are just making 50k.. guess what.. that is what a lot of people in this Country and USA make.

Depends on the industry though... If i work a simple office job that starts me at 40k at 22-23 years old, but i stay with that job taking minimal annual raises of every year, but i get to work in that job pretty securely until i'm 65 years old, not that bad.

I work as an athlete, where there is only a limited number of viable years i work at that professionally, all the while not building really any other skills once i do retire (in my mid-30's) but i only make 50-70k a year, that's a much bleaker outlook for the future.

[ag futbol]

The thing is though.. the median salary is what 90k a year. That's nothing to sneeze at. That's above the household income average in Canada. These guys aren't living in a shack unable to buy food. They get paid a good salary, and on top of that they get great treatment and food from their club. Let's not pretend that it's a horrible life.

Even if some are just making 50k.. guess what.. that is what a lot of people in this Country and USA make.
But that's not the point really. We're not talking about the average person. We're talking about 1) a-type personalities needed to succeed in pro sports 2). Guys who have to make a career change at some time given a short career.

I can break it down further but suffice to say given all the hurdles / risks involved sub 100k comp isn't enough for anyone in pro sports who has "made it" playing in MLS.

[gdg_9]

The thing is though.. the median salary is what 90k a year. That's nothing to sneeze at. That's above the household income average in Canada. These guys aren't living in a shack unable to buy food. They get paid a good salary, and on top of that they get great treatment and food from their club. Let's not pretend that it's a horrible life.

Even if some are just making 50k.. guess what.. that is what a lot of people in this Country and USA make.

Except these are not supposed to be average people. They are supposed to be highly specialized, elite workers!
Realistically, there are only 60 people living in Canada who can do what they do (play top-level professional soccer in this country).

Not to mention the fact that most people who make that salary don't have the time or travel demands of a North American Pro Athlete.

Makes it much harder for those players with families and kids.


I always think about a guy like Milos Kocic when these discussions come up.

How was he able to raise triplets living in TO making only $46k a year?
With the travel and time demands of a Pro Athlete, and the costs of child care, it must have been hard for his wife to try and have much of a career to help boost their household income...

I don't know if that had anything to do with his early retirement as an MLS soccer player, but I wouldn't be surprised!

[barticusz]

Except these are not supposed to be average people. They are supposed to be highly specialized, elite workers!
Realistically, there are only 60 people living in Canada who can do what they do (play top-level professional soccer in this country).

Not to mention the fact that most people who make that salary don't have the time or travel demands of a North American Pro Athlete.

Makes it much harder for those players with families and kids.


I always think about a guy like Milos Kocic when these discussions come up.

How was he able to raise triplets living in TO making only $46k a year?
With the travel and time demands of a Pro Athlete, and the costs of child care, it must have been hard for his wife to try and have much of a career to help boost their household income...

I don't know if that had anything to do with his early retirement as an MLS soccer player, but I wouldn't be surprised!

I get your point but here's my argument.. (though it has it's problems due to work permits).

Yes these people are elite at what they do. And if they are truely that elite there are places all around the globe searching for their talent. They are free to try and get jobs in other locations, they are not being forced to stay in North America, technically speaking. Your Example of Milos Koscic is a perfect example. He's from Serbia, has the ability to play for a club there or here. He CHOSE to play in the USA of the Salary that he's making. You can't complain that your salary is too low when you chose to sign the contract. If he was truly elite he'd get the money he thinks he is worth. If not, then he signs where he can play. BTW he is now in Hungary playing for a team there in their first division.

This argument just doesn't fly with me. Most people specialize in a specific skill and then continue to improve on it and grow in their positions. We generally call these people professionals at their skill too, but as we all know the majority of people are not elite. That is why so many of us sign off to work for the 91k a year jobs, and there are so few that get big fat contracts.

We shouldn't be overvaluing people's skill just because it is sport. A lot of people are being underpaid and their primary skill is using their brain over their physical ability.

[ag futbol]

This is moralistic though, an entirely different argument. Yes I agree as a society we over value sport. However, we won't be able I obtain players based on morals, only market prices.

It's easy to say they shouldn't sign the contract (many of them don't), but that really doesn't help us achieve the end goal of getting better players on the field.

[MightyDM]

He also stated that he was fully fit.
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/sports/soccer/jermain-defoe-back-training-with-toronto-fc-after-injury-layoff/article20761501/

And was basically absent on the pitch. Unacceptable.

Um, and then had surgery on the pre existing injury. Actually tried to play through it. He should get some acknowledgement for that.

[MightyDM]

I get your point but here's my argument.. (though it has it's problems due to work permits).

Yes these people are elite at what they do. And if they are truely that elite there are places all around the globe searching for their talent. They are free to try and get jobs in other locations, they are not being forced to stay in North America, technically speaking. Your Example of Milos Koscic is a perfect example. He's from Serbia, has the ability to play for a club there or here. He CHOSE to play in the USA of the Salary that he's making. You can't complain that your salary is too low when you chose to sign the contract. If he was truly elite he'd get the money he thinks he is worth. If not, then he signs where he can play. BTW he is now in Hungary playing for a team there in their first division.

This argument just doesn't fly with me. Most people specialize in a specific skill and then continue to improve on it and grow in their positions. We generally call these people professionals at their skill too, but as we all know the majority of people are not elite. That is why so many of us sign off to work for the 91k a year jobs, and there are so few that get big fat contracts.

We shouldn't be overvaluing people's skill just because it is sport. A lot of people are being underpaid and their primary skill is using their brain over their physical ability.

You can't make that argument when the domestic league has a salary cap and is otherwise anti competitive.

[gdg_9]

I get your point but here's my argument.. (though it has it's problems due to work permits).

Yes these people are elite at what they do. And if they are truely that elite there are places all around the globe searching for their talent. They are free to try and get jobs in other locations, they are not being forced to stay in North America, technically speaking. Your Example of Milos Koscic is a perfect example. He's from Serbia, has the ability to play for a club there or here. He CHOSE to play in the USA of the Salary that he's making. You can't complain that your salary is too low when you chose to sign the contract. If he was truly elite he'd get the money he thinks he is worth. If not, then he signs where he can play. BTW he is now in Hungary playing for a team there in their first division.

This argument just doesn't fly with me. Most people specialize in a specific skill and then continue to improve on it and grow in their positions. We generally call these people professionals at their skill too, but as we all know the majority of people are not elite. That is why so many of us sign off to work for the 91k a year jobs, and there are so few that get big fat contracts.

We shouldn't be overvaluing people's skill just because it is sport. A lot of people are being underpaid and their primary skill is using their brain over their physical ability.


That's just it though, people will choose to either play abroad or not play at all.

Which is why it is bad for the growth of the game here, and more importantly, with relation to the CBA Negotiations, bad for the league long-term.


You're right, the global market is pretty much open to pro-athletes to be able to play wherever their skills are valued most (with the caveat of being able to obtain a work permit).
But that is exactly why placing such harsh restrictions on the North American market (i.e. a salary cap in MLS) makes no sense if their ambition is to compete with the rest of the open global market.

[barticusz]

You can't make that argument when the domestic league has a salary cap and is otherwise anti competitive.

Sure I can. Look at the GA class this year. Those are the true higher end talents and they are negotiating deals that they feel are fair. If they think otherwise then they don't sign and go elsewhere. The league may be not be competitive due to a lack of free agency, but nothing is tying those players down and forcing them to sign their contracts.

[barticusz]

That's just it though, people will choose to either play abroad or not play at all.

Which is why it is bad for the growth of the game here, and more importantly, with relation to the CBA Negotiations, bad for the league long-term.


You're right, the global market is pretty much open to pro-athletes to be able to play wherever their skills are valued most (with the caveat of being able to obtain a work permit).
But that is exactly why placing such harsh restrictions on the North American market (i.e. a salary cap in MLS) makes no sense if their ambition is to compete with the rest of the open global market.

Why should the league pay someone more money than they are worth though? We're talking about the lowest end talent in the league. If they don't rise up and play better why should their salaries just arbitrarily rise?? Players who are good enough will earn their money.

Bendik came into the league as a backup goalie.. an area that is truely difficult to make a living in, but he impressed. He went from his $44k salary in 2012 to $140k in 2014. If Bendik thinks he is still underpaid for his talent level he's now got a few years under his belt that he can use as leverage to go and find a job somewhere else in the world. Say Bendik never did end up playing any better or earning a larger salary. Say he was still the 2nd string keeper and he was now making $60k. Should he just be paid more now for no performance based reason at all?

Konopka is getting paid 60K a year and all he does is train with the team. He hasn't stood out in training to be given a shot at the keeper position. That tells me his skill level is just not good enough.

[Fort York Redcoat]

I like that there are so many who want these players to get what they are worth. The problem is their worth skill-wise does not directly compare to what the league makes from their skill. Many want the min wage up- so do I. I'm also extremely cautious concerning overspending and killing momentum this sport has made.

[ag futbol]

Why should the league pay someone more money than they are worth though? We're talking about the lowest end talent in the league. If they don't rise up and play better why should their salaries just arbitrarily rise?? Players who are good enough will earn their money.

Bendik came into the league as a backup goalie.. an area that is truely difficult to make a living in, but he impressed. He went from his $44k salary in 2012 to $140k in 2014. If Bendik thinks he is still underpaid for his talent level he's now got a few years under his belt that he can use as leverage to go and find a job somewhere else in the world. Say Bendik never did end up playing any better or earning a larger salary. Say he was still the 2nd string keeper and he was now making $60k. Should he just be paid more now for no performance based reason at all?

Konopka is getting paid 60K a year and all he does is train with the team. He hasn't stood out in training to be given a shot at the keeper position. That tells me his skill level is just not good enough.
In a lot of cases we'd start seeing different players or more committed players than are currently on the books.

There is talent leakage and wage bump-ups would reduce that and draw better players in the future.

I used to work with a guy who trailed with TFC in year one. They offered him one of those 12k "development" deals. He walked. Most of those players never made the league or contributed anything. Once they raised the minimum to 35k it got better. When they pump it up again a similar dynamic will take place.

Wages draw talent. It's that simple.

[barticusz]

In a lot of cases we'd start seeing different players or more committed players than are currently on the books.

There is talent leakage and wage bump-ups would reduce that and draw better players in the future.

I used to work with a guy who trailed with TFC in year one. They offered him one of those 12k "development" deals. He walked. Most of those players never made the league or contributed anything. Once they raised the minimum to 35k it got better. When they pump it up again a similar dynamic will take place.

Wages draw talent. It's that simple.

That's a very interesting tidbit that I wasn't aware of. And that's where I sit on the same side as you. These new young talents need to be attracted to join the league and creating a higher basement does just that.

[MightyDM]

Sure I can. Look at the GA class this year. Those are the true higher end talents and they are negotiating deals that they feel are fair. If they think otherwise then they don't sign and go elsewhere. The league may be not be competitive due to a lack of free agency, but nothing is tying those players down and forcing them to sign their contracts.

Except the difficulty in getting work permits in other countries etcetera.

[Initial B]

My wish list for the CBA:

- A $4.5 million Salary Cap, with a 5% increase per year of the contract, at least, preferably $5 million

- $50/65K minimum salaries, at least, preferably $60/80K.

- $15-20K raises to all non-DP players, with 5% increases per year of the contract.

- An extra DP slot for domestics

- All DP salaries counting as 10% against the cap instead of the current 12.5%

- Leave free agency discussion for the next CBA. I think the current system works okay for now.

[ag futbol]

Agreed, mostly. They need to trash those multiple one year options as well, formally. That's rumoured to be how Camilo got out of his contract: Fifa likely would not have recognized them.

[jloome]

Agreed, mostly. They need to trash those multiple one year options as well, formally. That's rumoured to be how Camilo got out of his contract: Fifa likely would not have recognized them.

The issue wasn't that they weren't recognized but that MLS has enforced them as if only the league had to exercise the option; under FIFA regs it's up to both parties. There are no "unilateral" options unless written as such.

[Yohan]

https://twitter.com/amobisays/status/555223830780596225/photo/1

relevant

[DOMIN8R]

Excellent. We're third in the pecking order.

[OgtheDim]

Steven Goff ‏@SoccerInsider (https://twitter.com/SoccerInsider) 1m1 minute ago (https://twitter.com/SoccerInsider/status/555824641852575745) Garber, on MLS labor talks: "The dynamic is more positive than it was five years ago"

[Detroit_TFC]

Bobby Warshaw on the players' perspective:

http://screamer.deadspin.com/why-mls-may-be-headed-for-a-work-stoppage-1679956810?utm_campaign=socialflow_deadspin_twitte r&utm_source=deadspin_twitter&utm_medium=socialflow

[Wagner]

Bobby Warshaw on the players' perspective:

http://screamer.deadspin.com/why-mls-may-be-headed-for-a-work-stoppage-1679956810?utm_campaign=socialflow_deadspin_twitte r&utm_source=deadspin_twitter&utm_medium=socialflow

very interesting.